"~'-^! 


i-j-fc^Tt.;?- 


MASTER 
NEGA  TIVE 


^O.  91-80229-13 


MICROFILMED  1991 
COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  LIBRARIES/NEW  YORK 


as  part  of  the 
"Foundations  of  Western  Civilization  Preservation  Project" 


Funded  by  the 
NATIONAL  ENDOWMENT  FOR  THE  HUMANITIES 


Reproductions  may  not  be  made  without  permission  from 

Columbia  University  Library 


COPYRIGHT  STATEMENT 


The  copyright  law  of  the  United  States  ~  Title  17,  United 
States  Code  -  concerns  the  making  of  photocopies  or  other 
reproductions  of  copyrighted  material... 

Columbia  University  Library  reserves  the  right  to  refuse  to 
accept  a  copy  order  if,  in  its  judgement,  fulfillment  of  the  order 
would  involve  violation  of  the  copyright  law. 


AUTHOR: 


I 


•a:.  an.  *f 


;*■"«- 


w       |mi^«'' 


E.A 


TITLE: 


Ml    M.  .j  £m  \^  JLj  • 


UN 

TE: 


-4 


O 


PHICA 


A    ,  'fa 


^^^^^ 


COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  LIBRARIES 
PRESERVATION  DEPARTMENT 


Master  Negative  H 


I3I13LIOGIIAPHIC  MICROFORM  TARGET 


Original  Material  as  Filmed  -  Existing  Bibliographic  Record 


06  3M 

PI 

1910 


877.17 

Z 

v.l 


E.  A.   (Ellas  Avery),   1879-1969. 
Lowe,  Eliao  Avory^  1879   1969. 

...  Studia  palaeop;raphica;  a  contribution  to  the  history  of 
early  Latin  minuscule  and  to  the  dating  of  Visigothic  mss., 
with  seven  facsimiles,  by  E.  A.  Loew.  Vor^elegt  am  5.  no- 
veniber  liilO.  Munchen,  Konitrlich  bayerische  akademie  der 
wissenschaften,  in  kommission,  G.  Franz,  1910. 

vlli,  91  I).  7  facsini.  22i^».  (Sitziinpsberichte  der  Konlglich  bave- 
rischen  akademie  der  wissenschaften,  riiilosophisch-pbUologische  und 
hlstoriscbe  klasse,  jabrg.  1910,  12.  abbandlung) 

l.Paleograpby.  Latin.  2.  PAleograpiiy,  Italian.  3.  Paleograpby,  Span- 
ish.       L  Title,    u.  Title:  Vlsigotblc  manuscripts.      "-       *'    *    •^'    ^ 


Anothor  copy.     1910. 

Library  of  Congress 
Copy  i». 


(Same  originally:  Ellas  Avery  Loewj 

Volume  of  paxiphjI^^Lb^^ 

AS182.M823     Jabrg.  1910, 12.  abb. 

Z114.L91 

i34bl, 


Restrictions  on  Use: 


TECHNICAL  MICROFORM  DATA 


FILM     SIZE: j^^^ 

IMAGE  PLACEMENT:    lA  Cll 


REDUCTION     RATIO: 


_      ID     IIU 

DATE     FILMED: ^//^^/^     INITIALS^_ii/^_4</r_^. 

HLMEDBY:    RESEARCH  PUBLICATIONS.  INC  WOODURIDGF.  CT 


7/^..___ 


C 


Association  for  Information  and  Image  Management 

1 1 00  Wayne  Avenue,  Suite  1 1 00 
Silver  Spring,  Maryland  20910 

301/587-8202 


Centimeter 

12         3        4 


m 


iiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiii 


rTTT7 


Inches 


5         6         7        8         9        10       n 

iIiiiiIiiiiIiiiiIiiiiIhiiIiiiiIiiiiIiiiiImiiIhiiIiiiiIiiiiIhi 


1.0 


I.I 


1.25 


TTT 


TTT 


12       13       14       15    mm 

liiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiiliiiil 


iiiiiii 


m      2.8 

yg 

25 

y.        3.2 
If        '* 

2.2 

2.0 

1.8 

1.4 

1.6 

MflNUFRCTURED   TO   flllM   STflNDfiRDS 
BY   nPPLIED   IMAGE,     INC. 


iiaiiiagtimir*^^''^^^^'''^^ 


,.y.a.;ia----^------— ffitiiiitftiiiiiiiififtitiiii 


^^^h,.>^Hiia«itffc.||lpa^^ 


J 

1 ' 


877  17 


Columbia  ®nit)trs?ftp 


LIBRARY 


t^ 


*^ 


I' 


t 


i  I 


1 


' 


-  COITEMTS 


1.  Lowe,  E.  A.   Studia  pelaeographia ;  a  con- 
tribution to  the  history  of  early  Latin 
miniscule.   1910. 

2.  Gardthausen,  Viktor,  tostarna;  oder, 
Servius  Tullis.   1882. 


5.  Dasti,  Luigi.   Corneto  Tarqumm. 


1878. 


4.  Sartori,  Karl.   Studien  aus  dem  gebiete 
der  griechischen  privataltertunier .  1893. 

5.  Schliemann,  Heinrich.  Bericht  iiber  die 
;rabungen  in  Troja  im  jahre  1890.  1891 


ausg 


^11 -H 


.1 


\ 


\\ 


o,\ 


Sitzungsberichte 

der 

Koniglicli  Bayeriscben  Akadeiuie   der  Wissenschaften 

Philosophisch-philologische  und  historische  Klasse 

Jahrgang  1910,   12.  Abhandlung 


Studia  Palaeographica 

A  contribution  to  the  history  of  early  Latin 
minuscule  and  to  the  dating  of  Visigothic  MSS 

with  seven  facsimiles 


.  •  •    by 


1 


»  »  » .» 


•  *  « » «  • 


.   .  .E^  .A.  Loev;. . 


>     ■       « 


(      (  ■      *     *  t     « 


•w-  t 


•         ■ 


Vorgf'leat  an'i   5.'-Nx/venfibar   1910 


Munchen  1910 
Verlag  der  K5niglich  Bajerischen  Akademie  der  Wissenschaften 

in  Kommisaion  des  G.  Franz'schen  Verla{,'s  (J.  Roth) 


•  - 


V  ( 


To 


•  •  •• 


•  •  • 


•  •  • 

•  •  • 


•  • 


I; 


the  memory  of 


•  • 


•*  • 


•  •  •   • 
• » »  •  • 

•  •  • 


•.•  •  -  • 


LEOPOLD  DELIb 


1  <  I  J  • 


"s. 


'/f* 


n 


,-i»-' 


Since  the  epoch-making  contention  of  Scipio  Maffei,  the 
illustrious  Veronese  archaeologian  and  palaeographer,  we  have 
come  more  and  more  to  recognize  with  him  how  important 
a  role  was  played  by  the  Cursiva  Romana,  i.  e.  the  notarial 
script  of  the  early  middle  ages,  in  the  formation  of  nearly 
all  types  or  schools  of  early  minuscule.  It  was  the  rise  and 
rapid  spread  of  the  Caroline  book-hand  which  proved  fatal 
to  the  local  manner  of  writing  in  most  centres.  The  tra- 
ditional script  with  its  cursive  letters  and  ligatures  completely 
succumbed  —  in  one  place  sooner,  in  another  later  —  to  the 
minuscule  whose  principle  was  simplicity  and  clarity.  In  giving 
thus  a  new  direction  to  book- writing,  the  Caroline  reform 
interrupted  a  development  already  past  its  first  stage,  and 
effaced  the  signs  of  relationship  which  united  the  different 
pre-Caroline  types.  Yet  we  can  still  realize  the  closeness 
of  that  relationship,  and  get,  as  it  were,  an  epitome  of  the 
history  of  early  minuscule,  by  concentrating  attention  upon 
one  or  two  typical  traits.  And  for  this  purpose  there  is  per- 
haps nothing  more  interesting  or  instructive  than  a  study  of 
the  usage  of  i-longa  and  ii. 

In  the  following  studies  a  modest  attempt  is  made  to  trace 
the  history  of  i-longa,  by  giving  an  account  of  its  cursive 
origin,  its  entrance  into  calligraphic  MSS,  its  rapid  spread 
and  short-lived  vogue  in  all  but  two  schools,  and  the  rules 
which  in  those  tw^o  schools  seem  to  have  governed  its  use. 
This  account  can  be  turned  to  practical  use  by  the  philologist. 
To  the  palaeographer  its  value  lies  in  the  light  it  throws  on 
the  different  types  of  minuscule  in  process  of  formation,  and 
in  the  explanation  it  offers  for  such  curious  phenomena  as  the 
employment  of  i-longa  in  early  examples  of  schools  so  far 
removed  from  each  other  by  space  and  tradition  as  the  Spanish 
and  the  north  Italian. 

The  remaining  and  larger  part  of  these  studies  deals 
with  the  history  of  ti,  and  tries  to  show  through  what  medium 
the  fi-ligature  was  introduced  into  calligraphy;  how  it  was 
used  in  various  centres  and  then  discarded  by  all  but  the  Bene- 
ventan;  how  the  last-named  script  reserved  it  for  the  specific 


VI 


12.  Abhandlung:  K.  A.  Loew 


purpose   of   indicating   the    assibilated    sound    of  ti;    how   the 
Visigothic    like    the  Beneventan    graphically    distinguished  the 
hard"  and  soft  sound  of  ti;    and  how   this  practice  furnishes  a 
terminus  a  quo  for  dating  Visigothic  MSS  -   a  criterion  whose 
application    will  remove   some  traditional  errors    from  Spanish 
palaeography    and    prove    its  validity  in  several   mooted  cases. 
Incidentally   the  question  of  transcribing   this  ligature  will  be 
raised    as  well    as  that  of  a  similar  form    which    has  been   a 
problem  in  diplomatics    -   a  form    of  ^   as  yet  unrecorded  in 
our  literature.    The  question  of  phonetics  is  outside  the  province  . 
of  this  investigation.     If  the  data  based  upon  the  MSS  which 
served  my  palaeographical  purposes  prove   also   of  some  value 
as  raw  material  and  evidence  to  the  student  of  Romanic  lang- 
uages, it  will  only  serve  to  confirm  my  conviction  that  apparently 
insignificant    and    usually   neglected   graphic  points   have  their 
bearing  upon   the  broader  problems  of  history  and  philology. 
To  avoid    repetition    the  data    for  i-longa    and  ti   will  be 
given  together;  their  history  will  be  treated  separately. 

My  warmest  thanks  are  due  to  Professor  W.  M.Lindsay. 
These  studies  have  profited  from  his  interest  and  advice  as  well 
as  by  the  information  which  he  put  at  my  disposal  with  rare 
generosity.  I  am  also  grateful  to  Professor  C.U.Clark  for 
his  kindness  in  permitting  me  to  make  use  of  his  valuable 
collection  of  Visigothic  photographs  prior  to  their  publication. 
Lastly  it  is  my  pleasant  duty  to  acknowledge  my  in- 
debtedness to  the  American  School  of  Classical  Studies  in 
Rome  under  the  auspices  of  which  I  have  had  the  privilege 
of  continuing  my  studies  as  Research  Associate  of  the  Carnegie 
Institution  of  Washington.  To  the  Director  of  the  school  and 
to  the  members  of  the  committee  in  America  I  herewith  ex- 
press my  sincere  sense  of  obligation. 

It  is  not  to  be  my  privilege  to  put  this  monograph  into 
the  hands  of  Leopold  De lisle.  In  remembrance  of  his  kind- 
ness in  making  public  a  portion  of  the  results,  I  do  myself 
the  honor  of  dedicating  these  studies  to  his  memory. 

Rome,  July  1910. 


It 


Studia  palaeographica. 


VII 


Table  of  Contents. 


P   «t 


I. 

Preface        .... 
i-longa  in  inscriptions 
i-longa  in  cursive 
Origin  of  i-longa  in  MSS 
Function  of  i-longa  in  MSS 
Summary  of  usage  in  MSS 
Usage  in  particular  schools 

a)  In  Visigothic 

b)  In  Beneventan 
i-longa  as  a  sign  of  relationship   between  the 
i-longa  and  philology         .... 

a)  Practical  value  of  rules  for  i-longa 

b)  Resemblance  of  i-longa  and  I 

c)  Interchange  of  i  and  g  and  vice-versa 

d)  Corruptions  in  text  due  to  this  interchange 


schools 


Page 
V 

1 

2 

4 
5 

7 

^ 
t 

8 

9 

10 
13 
13 
14 
14 
15 


II. 

Assibilation  of  tK     The  ii-distinction 

The  ligature  ti.     Its  forms 

Origin  of  the  ligature 

Usage  in  cursive 

Summary  of  usage  in  MSS 

Transcription   of  ^     . 

Transcription  of  a  similarly  formed  £ 


16 
19 
20 
20 
23 
25 
26 


III. 


The  MS  evidence 

a)  Uncial    .         .         .         • 

b)  Semi-uncial    . 

c)  Early  French  minuscule 


29 
30 
30 
30 


^  -41 


7* 


rt 


VIII 


12.   Abhaiidluncr:   K.   A    Loew 


d)  Early  Italian  minuscule 

e)  The  Beneventan  MS^S^  . 

f)  German  schools 

g)  Insular  MSS 


IT. 


ti  m  Visigothic  MSS 

Nature  of  evidence 

Works  cited 

MS  evidence 

Evidence  of  corrections,  additions  and  docuuienis. 

Results.    Criterion  for  dating    .... 

Four  periods  in  Visigothic  writing 

The  fi-criterion  tested 


V. 


Plates 


VI. 


Index  of  MSS 


Page 
39 
46 
47 
49 


52 

54 
55 
56 
70 

78 
80 
81 


1      - 


80 


88 


.■« 


; 


Studia  palaeographica. 


I. 

The  main  function  of  i-longa   with  which  the  student  of 
Latin    epigraphy    is  acquainted    is   foreign    to    the    i-Ionga    of 
Latin   MSS.     The  i-longa  in  words  like  vIxiT,    lIberti,  dIvo, 
pkIncipi  etc.   of  Roman    inscriptions    serves   the  specific    pur- 
pose   of    denoting    the    long    quantity    of    the    letter  i.^)     In 
Latin    MSS    i-longa    has    no   reference    whatever    to  quantity. 
The  use    of  i-longa    in  inscriptions  is,    on  the  whole,  optional 
and    not  strictly    defined.     One    engraver  may   use  it,    another 
of  the  same    period    may  not.      And   the   same  engraver   may 
use  it  to  indicate    the  long  vowel  in  one  part  of  the  inscrip- 
tion   and    not    in    another.      It  may    be    employed    at   the  be- 
ginning   of    a   line    merely    as  a   decorative    element,    likewise 
in  the  middle   of  the   line    as  in   flamIne^)   or  out  of  a  sense 
of  reverence  as  in  Imperatori^)    In  MSS,   on  the  other  hand  — 
at  least  in  those  of  certain  schools  and  certain  periods   -    the 
use    of  i-longa    is  obligatory  and  subject,    as  we  shall  see,    to 
definite  rules.*)     If  there   are    these   differences,    there    is  also 
one  important  point  of  similarity. 

1)  On    the    subject    of   i-longa    in    inscriptions    see:    Christiansen, 
De    apicibus  et  i-longis    inscriptionum    latinai-um    (Kieler  Disser.    1889), 

p.  26  sqq. 

2)  Christiansen,  1.  c,  p.  28.     The  Corpus  Inscr.  Lat.  is  full  of  such 

examples. 

3)  Ibid.,  p.  37. 

*)  See  below,  p.  8  sq.  Excepting  the  brief  report  of  my  observations 
which  was  made  by  Leopold  Delisle  (Comptes-rendus  de  I'Academie  des 
inscriptions,  1909,  p.  775— 778)  and  reprinted  with  corrections  in  the 
Bibliotheque  de  I'ecole  dea  chartes  LXXI  (1910),  2.^3-235,  there  exists 
no  connected  account  of  i-longa  in  MSS.  The  usual  statement  found 
in  the  descriptions  of  plates  is  that  i-longa  occurs  often  at  the  beginning 
of  the  word  and  occasionally  in  the  middle. 

Sitzgsb.  d.  philos.-philol.  u.  d.  hist.  Kl.  Jahrg.  1910,  12.  Abh.  J 


I- 


2  12.  Abhandlung:  E.  A.  Loew 

The  use  of  i-longa  to  denote  the  semi-vocal  sound,  which 
in  inscriptions  is  as  old  as  the  use  of  i-longa  itself,  is  a  con- 
stant feature  of  those  MSS  which  regularly  employ  i-longa. 
Such  familiar  epigraphic  forms  as  eIus,  huIus,  COnIunx, 
lUNiUS  etc.,  have  their  exact  graphic  equivalent  in  Latin  doc- 
uments and  MSS.  Yet  there  is  this  difference:  the  engraver 
may  make  a  long  or  a  short  i  in  eIus,  Iunius  etc.,  but 
during  many  centuries  the  scribe  of  southern  Italy  or  Spain 
is  obliored  to  use  the  long  form  —  as  can  be  seen  from  the 
evidence  cited  below.  Against  the  one  point  of  similarity, 
then,  there  are  several  points  of  difference,  one  of  which  alone 
is  so  grave  as  to  make  it  quite  improbable  that  the  use  of 
i-longa  in  MSS  is  a  direct  inheritance  from  inscriptions.  For, 
if  that  were  the  case,  should  we  not  expect  to  find  MSS  with 
i-longa  used  to  indicate  the  long  quantity?  Such  MSS,  how- 
ever, do  not  exist. 

Yet  a  point  of  contact  between  the  mediaeval  and  the 
ancient  practice  respecting  i-longa  doubtless  exists.  It  is  to  be 
sought,  I  believe,  in  the  domain  of  cursive  writing.  As  a  matter 
of  fact,  we  find  i-longa  in  the  Pompeian  mural  inscriptions  in 
cursive  used  in  the  manner  in  which  it  is  later  employed  in 
mediaeval  documents  and  MSS,  namely,  at  the  beginning  of 
the  w^ord  regardless  of  quantity  or  the  meaning  of  the  word, 
and  medially  for  the  semi-vocal  sound.  ^)  In  order  to  see  how 
the  ancient  cursive  practice  was  taken  over  and  introduced 
into  calligraphy  we  must  examine  the  connecting  link,  i.  e.  the 
mediaeval  or  ''later"  cursive.  Without  going  too  far  into  detail 
the  usage  in  the  documents  may  be  briefly  sketched  as  follows. 

The   Ravenna    documents    on  papyrus  of  the  6^^  and  7*^^ 
centuries*)    —    and    not    a  few    of  them    have   come   down   to 


1)  Cf.  Christiansen,  1.  c,  p.  36  and  C.  I.  L.  IV,  indices,  p.  258. 

*)  In  fact,  i-longa  is  found  also  in  earlier  documents.  In  Marini's 
facsimile  (Papiri  Diplomatici,  Rome  1805),  pi.  6,  No.  82,  a.  489  I  find  Id, 
lubeatis.  But  in  the  still  older  example  of  cursive  on  papyrus,  in  Strass- 
burg  (Pap.  lat.  Argent.  1),  i-longa  is  used  apparently  without  any  system: 
domlne,  Inimltabili,  benlvolentiae  etc.  Facs.  Arndt-Tangl,  Schrifttafeln, 
Heft  2*,  pi.  32  A;  Steflfens,  Lat.  Pal.2,  pi.  13. 


Studia  palaeographica.  " 

ugi)  —  show   the   frequent    occurrence    of  initial   and    medial 
i-longa:  In,  Interfui,  Iterum,  Ipsum,  huIus  etc.  etc. 

Marginalia  found  in  6^^  century  semi-uncial  MSS  written 
in  a  slanting  uncial-cursive  of  the  same  time  also  show  the 
i-longa  initially.  ^) 

North  Italian  documents  of  the  Lombard  regime  are  con- 
spicuous for  the  regularity  with  which  they  use  i-longa  initially 
and  medially.  Even  in  words  like  ilia  the  long  i  is  used. 
The  usual  examples  are:  Id,  lustitia,   huIus  etc.^) 

The  earliest  south  Italian  documents  show  a  similar  use 
of  i-longa.  In  the  Beneventan  centres  the  practice  lasts  well 
into  the  13^^  century,  and  examples  are  known  even  in  the  14*^  .*) 

Although  no  pre-Caroline  documents  from  the  papal 
chancery  have  come  down  to  us,  those  of  the  9*^  century  and 
after  may  be  assumed  to  represent  an  older  tradition.  They 
show  the  use  of  i-longa  initially  and  medially,  as  do  the  Ben- 
eventan documents,  for  many  centuries.^)  The  same  holds  for 
the  non-papal  documents    of  the  city   of  Rome   and  vicinity.^) 

1)  They  may  be  studied  to  advantage  at  the  Vatican  library  and 
the  British  Museum.  Facs.  Pal.  Society,  pi.  2,  28;  Arch.  Pal.  Ital.  I, 
pi.  1—6;  Arndt-Tangl,  1.  c,  Heft  1*,  pi.  I  c,  2. 

2)  1  refer  to  marginalia  of  the  type  seen  in  Delisle,  Alb.  Pal.,  pi.  7 
(MS  Lyon  523).  Similar  cursive  exists  in  Vatic,  lat.  3375,  Monte  Cassino 
150,  Rome,  Basil icanus  D  182  and  others. 

3)  Facs.  Bonelli,  Cod.  Pal  Lombardo,  passim;  Schiaparelli,  Bullet, 
deir  1st.  Stor.  Ital.  30  (1909),  2  plates. 

*)  Facs.  Russi,  Paleografia  e  diplomatica  de' documenti  delle  pro- 
vincie  Napolitane,  Naples  lb83;  Codex  Dipl.  Cavensis,  Voll.  I— VII,  1873 
-1888;  Codice  Dipl.  Barese,  Voll.  I,  IV  and  V,  Bari  1897-1902;  Morea, 
11  Chartularium  del  monastero  d.  s.  Benedetto  di  Conversano,  Monte  Cas- 
sino 1892 ;  Piscicelli-Taeggi,  Saggio  di  Scrittura  notarile,  Monte  Cassino 
1888 ;  Voigt,  Beitriige  zur  Diplomatik  der  langobardischen  Fiirsten  von 
Benevent   etc.,    Gottingen    1902    and   Archiv.  Pal.  Ital.   Vol.  VII   (1909), 

fasc.  31,  pi.  20—26. 

5)  Facs  Pflugk-Harttung,  Specimina  Selecta  Chartarum  Pontificum 
Romanorum.     Stuttgart   1886;  also  Steflfens,  Lat.  Pal.^  pi.  58  and  62. 

6)  Facs.  Hartmann,  Ecclesiae  S.  Mariae  in  Via  Lata  Tabularium, 
Vienna  1895-1901;   Fedele,  in  Archiv.  Pal.  Ital.  VoL  VI  (1909),  fasc.  30 

and  Vol.  VI  (1910),  fasc.  34. 

1* 


4  12.  Abhandlung:  E.  A.  Loew 

In  the  Merovingian  documents,  of  which  a  considerable 
number  exist  in  excellent  state  of  preservation,  the  i-longa 
plays  a  rather  inconspicuous  role.^)  It  is  manifestly  not  at  home 
there.  It  may  be  observed  initially  here  and  there.  Often 
enough  it  is  found  in  the  body  of  a  word  at  the  end  of  a 
syllable,  or  at  the  end  of  a  word,  e.  g.  nostrl.  This  use,  it 
should  be  noted,  is  also  found  in  some  semi-uncial  MSS  and 
some  French  8*^  century  minuscule  MSS  which  recall  semi- 
uncial,  e.  g.  Epinal  68.  But  the  Italian  practice  found  its  way 
across  the  Alps.  Initial  i-longa  may  be  seen  quite  frequently  in 
many  diplomas 2)  and  other  French  and  German^)  documents 
of  the  Caroline  age  and  later,  but  its  use  is  inconstant. 

The  Spanish  notaries,  as  far  as  I  can  judge  from  the  rather 
inadequate  facsimiles  of  Merino  and  Munoz  y  Rivera,*)  make 
constant  use  of  i-longa  initially  and  medially  for  j  —  precisely 
in  the  manner  of  the  8*^^  century  north  Italian  notaries.  The 
practice  lasts  as  long  as  the  Visigothic  script  remains  in  vogue. 
With  this  rapid  survey  before  us  we  are  more  in  a  po- 
sition to  discuss  the  question  of  the  origin   of  i-longa. 

If  we  consider  on  the  one  hand  the  utter  absence  of 
i-lonsra  in  the  oldest  Latin  MSS  in  uncial  and  semi-uncial 
from  the  4'*"  to  the  7'^  century,  and  its  gradual  and  tentative 
entrance  only  into  uncial  and  semi-uncial  MSS  of  the  recent 
type  i.  e.  of  the  8^*"  and  9*^  centuries;  and  on  the  other  hand 
its  very  frequent  and  continued  use  in  cursive  documents  dating 
from  the  6^''  to  the  9^^  century  (in  many  cases  even  much 
later  than  the  9*^  century),  it  seems  reasonable  to  explain  the 
presence  of  i-longa  in  most  of  the  pre-Caroline  MSS  in  min- 
uscule   as  the  result    of  direct  imitation    of  the   cursive.     Nor 


^)  Faca.  Lauer-Samaran,  Les  Diplomes  originaux  des  Merovingiens. 

^)  Fac8.  V.  Sybel  &  Sickel,  Kaiserurkunden  in  Abbildungen  (Berlin 
1880—1891)  especially  Lieferung  I  and  III;  also  Schiaparelli,  Archiv.  Pal. 
Ital.  Vol.  IX  (1910),  fasc.  33,  pi.  1  —  12. 

^)  For  German  documents  see  facs.  in  Chroust's  Monumenta  Palaeo- 
graphica. 

*)  Merino,  Escuela  Paleografica,  1780  and  Munoz  y  Rivera,  Paleo- 
grafia  Visigoda,  Madrid  1881. 


^ 
•« 


»• 


; 


Studia  palaeographica.  & 

would  i-longa   in   this  respect    present   an  exceptional  pheno- 
menon.     An    examination    of  the    extant    examples    of  early 
minuscule  of  the  7*^  and  8^''  centuries  shows  that  often  enough 
the  calligraphic    scribe   of  those  centuries    did  not    hesitate  to 
appropriate    from    the    domain    of   the    notary    many    another 
feature  beside  the  i-longa.    The  fact  is  familiar  to  the  palaeo- 
grapher.    He  thinks  at  once  of  the  open  a,  the  broken  c,  the 
peculiar  t,  as  well  as  of  the  more  striking  ligatures  of  fi,  riy  ti, 
te,  ta,  til  etc.     Moreover  a  comparison  of  the  calligraphic  pro- 
ducts in  minuscule  of  the  7^^  and  8**^  centuries  with  the  notarial 
documents  of  the  same  period  will  convince  any  observer  that 
the  calligrapher  borrowed  freely  from  the  notary.    It  is  hardly 
necessary   to  demonstrate    that   the  reverse    was  not   the  case. 
For  the  careful    methods    of  the  calligrapher    were   not  suited 
to  the  rapid,  economical  and  practical  methods  of  the  notary ; 
whereas    the  calligrapher,    in  his  efforts    to  form   a  minuscule 
script,  that  is  a  more  economical  script,  took  over  cursive  liga- 
tures  and    cursive  forms    of  single  letters   because    they    were 
more  easily  traceable  and  thus  more  economical.    Finally,  con- 
siderable light   is  thrown    upon    the  origin   of  i-longa  by  the 
fact  that  it  flourishes  in  MSS  which  employ  cursive  elements, 
and  that  it  is  avoided  in  MSS  in  which   cursive  elements   are 
few  or  wanting    altogether.     In  other  words,   the  company  in 
which  we  find  i-longa  is  a  fair  indication   of  its  origin.^)     In 
view    of  the    above    considerations    there    can   hardly    be    any 
serious  doubt   that   i-longa   came  into  MSS  from   the   cursive. 
The    primary    purpose    which    i-longa    served    in    cursive 
writing    can    only    be  conjectured.     The  fact    that   it  is    most 
frequently  found  at  the  beginning   of  a  word  suggests  that  it 
owes    its  origin   to  the  desire    of  facilitating  the  reading;    the 
appearance  of  the   long  form  of  i   indicating  at  once  the  be- 


1)  See  below,  p.  12.  In  Paris  653,  a  north  Italian  MS  of  about 
800  A.  D.,  this  point  is  clearly  illustrated.  On  fob  6^  two  hands  can  be 
seen.  The  first  used  the  a'-ligature  and  the  i-longa  regularly.  The  other 
hand  used  neither.  Cf.  plate  2.  This  facsimile  1  owe  to  the  kindness 
of  Prof.  W.  M.  Lindsay. 


/ 


,'A 


6  12.  Abhandlung:  E.  A.  Loew 

ginning  of  a  word.  Whereas  the  book-hand  with  its  scrip- 
tura  continua  neglected  such  aids,  partly  no  doubt  for  reasons 
of  symmetry,  in  cursive,  on  the  other  hand,  where  symmetry 
played  no  role,  where  words  were  often  abbreviated  by  any 
capricious  suspension,  and  a  short  letter  like  i  could  be  easily 
overlooked,  the  use  of  a  long  form  of  the  letter  i  initially 
must  have  been  of  signal  assistance  to  the  notary  who  had 
to  read  or  copy  the  document.^)  Perhaps  this  need  of  giving 
more  body  to  the  small  letter  i  was  first  felt  in  words  in 
which  letters  with  short  strokes  followed  initial  i,  as  In,  Im- 
peratoris^)  etc.  By  analogy  its  use  may  have  spread  to  any 
word,  so  that  in  the  8^^  century  north  Italian  documents  lUe 
and  ibi  are  written  with  i-longa  as  well  as  in,  imperatoris  etc. 

But  we  find  i-longa  in  documents  not  alone  at  the  be- 
ginning of  the  word,  but  also  in  the  body.  The  reasons  sug- 
gested above  for  using  i-longa  initially  are  in  so  far  applic- 
able to  its  use  in  the  body  of  the  word  as  the  long  form  of 
the  letter  here  also  facilitated  reading.  A  consideration,  how- 
ever, of  the  examples  of  medial  i-longa  shows  that  with  this 
form  of  the  letter  went  a  specific  pronunciation.  The  writing 
of  hiiltis,  cuius,  fualor,  leluniis,  makes  it  clear  that  the  long 
form  of  i  has  reference  to  its  semi-vocal  sound. 

Whatever  may  have  been  the  reasons  for  the  employment 
of  i-longa  in  cursive,  the  important  fact  remains  that  in  many 
pre-Caroline  documents  the  long  form  is  constantly  used  in 
these  two  ways:  initially,  and  also  medially  for  the  semi- 
vocal  sound. 


1)  In  this  connection  it  is  interesting  to  cite  Zangemeister's  opinion 
respecting  the  purpose  of  i-longa  in  the  Pompeian  mural  incriptions  in 
cursive:  "Patet  maxime  in  eis  (sc.  inscriptionibus  parietariis  Pompeianis), 
quae  cursivis  litteris  exaratae  sunt,  inscriptionibus  i  saepe  productam 
esse  non  alia  de  causa  nisi  ut  eius  litterae  forma  niagis  plane  et  per- 
spicua  redderetur".    C.  I.  L.  IV,  indices,  p.  258. 

*)  At  any  rate,  it  is  a  striking  fact  that  i-longa  clings  longest  to 
such  words  as  in,  ita  etc.  even  in  scripts  which  had  given  up  its  regular 
employment. 


,J 


r 


Studia  palaeographica.  • 

It  is  precisely  this  use  of  i-longa  that  we  encounter  in  MSS. 

From  data  given  below ^)  the  course  of  i-longa  in  MSS 
may  be  sketched  as  follows.  Unknown  to  the  oldest  types  of 
uncial  and  semi-uncial,  it  gradually  enters  into  their  more 
recent  types  and  is  used  there  tentatively  and  irregularly.  2) 
The  earliest  minuscule  MSS  of  Italy,  France  and  Spain,  those 
MSS  which  are  occasionally  styled  "half-cursive"  or  "minuscule- 
cursive"  make  constant  use  of  i-longa.  The  regular  use  of  it 
which  is  observable  in  8*^  century  north  Italian  cursive  docu- 
ments has  its  exact  parallel  in  contemporaneous  north  Italian 
MSS.  In  France  the  i-longa  is  a  feature  of  those  pre-Caroline 
minuscule  types  which  still  cling  to  the  cursive  elements,  e.  g. 
the  Luxeuil  type  and  the  c<  type.  During  the  8*^  century  it 
already  begins  to  lose  ground  in  France,  so  that  many  a  Corbie 

MS  of  the  icb  type  either  lacks  it  entirely  or  uses  it  sparingly. 
In  time  it  is  practically  eliminated  from  French  calligraphy  by 
the  Caroline  reform.  To  the  compact,  orderly  and  neat  Caro- 
line script  such  a  trait  as  i-longa  manifestly  appeared  uncalli- 
graphic  and  was  therefore  avoided.  Its  employment  in  Italy 
lasts  as  long  as  Caroline  influence  does  not  interfere.  When 
the  scriptoria  of  northern  and  central  Italy  adopted  the  Caro- 
line script,  i-longa  was  given  up  along  with  the  other  cursive 
features  which  formed  part  and  parcel  of  the  native  hand.  In 
southern  Italy,  however,  as  well  as  in  Spain,  the  foreign  forces 
never  possessed  sufficient  energy  to  modify  the  local  scripts. 
The  old  cursive  practice  of  using  i-longa,  therefore,  continued 
as  long  as  the  native  script  remained  in  use. 

The  manner  in  which  i-longa  was  used  in  MSS  has  in 
a  general  way  already  been  indicated.  But  two  schools  de- 
mand our  particular  attention,  for  in  Visigothic  and  Beneventan 
calligraphy  the  regular  employment  of  i-longa  lasted  for  over 
four  centuries  and  died  out  only  when  the  scripts  went  out  of 
fashion.     In  the  case,  therefore,  of  these  two  schools  it  is  ad- 


1)  See  the  evidence  cited  in  the  Ust  of  MSS  p.  29  sqq. 

2)  The  presence  of  i-longa  in   an  uncial  MS  is   an   unfaihng  sign 
that  it  is  of  the  recent  type. 


4  4 


8 


12.  Abhandlun^:  E.  A.  Loew 


visable    to  illustrate    somewhat    more    fully    the    rules    which 
governed  the  use  of  i-longa. 

In  Visigothic. 

I.  At  the  beginning  of  a  word  i  has  the  long  form. 

e.  g.  lam,   Ibi,    Iccirca,    Id,  lecit,    Ignem,    Ihs,   lUe, 
Impar,  In,  lovita,  Ipse,  Ira,  Iste,  Itinera,  lus  etc. 
Exception. 

When  initial  i  is  followed  by  a  tall  letter  the  use  of 
i-longa  is  not  obligatory, 
e.  g.  ibi,  ihs,  ille  (written  with  a  short  i). 

11.  Semi-vocal  i  requires  the  long  form.^) 

e.  g.  malas,    alebat,    prolciatur,    alt,    galus,   elus,^) 
leluniis  etc. 

The  Spanish  scribe  adhered  to  these  rules  with  unusual 
strictness.  If  he  wrote  in  or  huiiis  with  a  short  i  it  happened 
through  inattention  or  slavish  copying  from  an  original  which 
did  not  use  i-longa.     In  any  case    he  was  breaking  a  rule  of 


1)  It  is  interesting  to  note  that  Isidore  does  not  speak  of  i-longa 
as  a  means  of  denoting  semi-vocal  i.  He  would  perhaps  have  mentioned 
it,  if  scribes  and  notaries  of  his  time  had  made  such  use  of  i-longa. 
His  statement,  however,  is  merely  an  excerpt  from  an  earlier  writer: 
*'t  litteram  inter  duas  vocales  constitutam  bis  scribi  quidam  existimabant 
ut  Troiia,  Maiia,  sed  hoc  ratio  non  permittit.  Nunquam  enim  tres  vo- 
cales in  una  syllaba  scribuntur.  Sed  i  littera  inter  duas  vocales  con- 
stituta  pro  duplice  habetur".     Etymol.  1,  27,  11. 

2)  Much  light  upon  Visigothic  palaeography  was  thrown  by  Delisle's 
description  of  the  Silos  MSS  in  Melanges  de  paleographie  et  de  hihlioyraphie. 
From  what  he  says  of  i-longa  (p.  56)  it  appears  that  he  failed  to  realise 
the  rules  governing  its  use:  "On  trouve  I  capital  tres  allonge  non  seule- 
ment  au  commencement  du  mot,  raais  encore  a  la  fin,  surtout  quand  la 
desinence  est  figuree  sous  nne  forme  ahbreviatire:  el^  pour  ejus''  (italics 
are  mine).  The  fact  that  the  form  is  abbreviated  is  a  matter  of  indif- 
ference, eius  would  have  the  i-longa  even  if  written  out.  When  the  ws 
was  abbreviated  the  i-longa  naturally  remained.  But  i-longa  at  the  end 
of  a  word  is  absolutely  foreign  to  Spanish  calligraphy.  Mufioz,  Paleografia 
Visigoda,   has  nothing   on  the   regularity   of  i-longa  in  Visigothic  MSS. 


IV 


V 


Studia  palaeographica.  9 

the  script.  I  have  noted  such  irregularities  in  very  few  MSS.^) 
The  utter  neglect  of  the  rule  in  these  cases  was  a  proof  that 
the  scribe  was  laboring  under  foreign  influences. 

Here  mention  should  be  made  of  a  type  of  i-longa  pe- 
culiar to  Spanish  MSS.  It  is  a  long  i  with  a  forked  top 
resembling  on  the  whole  a  tall  y.  It  is  frequently  found 
in  the  word  ait.  Examples  are  cited  below  in  the  list  of 
Spanish  MSS. 

In  Beneventan. 

The  two  main  rules  for  initial  and  medial  i-longa  which 
prevailed  in  Visigothic  scriptoria  hold  for  Beneventan.^)  There 
is,  however,  this  difi'erence  between  the  Beneventan  and  the 
Spanish  scribe:  the  former  was  more  averse  to  using  i-longa 
before  a  shafted  letter.  He  regarded  it  as  un calligraphic  and 
therefore  eschewed  it.  It  is  only  in  very  few  Beneventan  MSS 
—  and  these  are  all  of  the  early  period,  i.  e.  of  the  8*^^  and 
9^''  centuries  —  that  we  find  initial  i  invariably  long.  The  rule 
is  to  write  short  i  when  the  following  letter  has  an  upper  or 
lower  shaft,  e.  g.  ibi,  ihs,  illi,  ipse,  ire  (the  r  has  a  shaft),  iste  etc. 

Another  exception  to  the  main  rule  of  initial  i-longa 
occurs  when  the  preposition  precedes  the  noun  which  begins 
wath  i,  e.  g.  ad  imagincm,  In  itaJiam.  In  such  cases  the  scribe 
was  accustomed  to  run  the  noun  and  the  preposition  together, 
and  as  he  wrote  them  together  he  regarded  the  phrase  as  a 
unit  and  therefore  wrote  short  i.  This  circumstance,  it  may 
be  noted  in  passing,  seems  to  confirm  what  has  been  said  of 
the  purpose  of  i-longa,  namely,  to  call  attention  to  the  begin- 
ning   of   a  word.     On    the    other  hand,    the  use  of  i-longa  in 


1)  e.g.  Paris  10876  and  10877.     See  below  list  of  Spanish  MSS. 

2)  How  little  the  rule  for  medial  i-longa  was  recognized  by  Ro- 
stagno  (Praefatio,  p.  IX,  to  the  Leyden  reproduction  of  the  Tacitus  MS, 
Floren.  Laur.  68,  2)  is  seen  from  his  words:  "i  grandi,  quae  vocatur, 
usus  est  non  nunquam  librarius  ineuntibus  vocabulis,  cum  praesertim 
subeat  u  littera:  semper,  ut  quidem,  post  u  in  vocabulo  cuius;  item  in 
iniuria,  obiectare,  maior,  coniugium,  coniunctio  cet.". 


10 


12.  Abhandlung:  E.  A.  Loew 


Studia  palaeographica. 


11 


delude,  exinde  is  doubtless  due  to  the  inveterate  habit  of  writing 
in  with  the  long  form  of  i,  the  excuse  being  furnished  by  the 
composite  character   of  the  two  words. 

It  is  possible  to  cite  not  a  few  instances  in  which  Bene- 
ventan  scribes  break  the  rules.  But  this  is  mainly  the  case 
during  the  formative  and  uncertain  period  of  the  script,  i.  e. 
durinor  the  8^^  and  9**"  centuries.  The  careful  scribe  conscien- 
tiously  observed  them,  and  the  best  possible  proof  that  they 
ivere  rules  of  the  script  is  furnished  by  the  autograph  of 
Leo  Ostiensis  (Monacensis  4623).  In  making  the  additions  and 
corrections  in  his  chronicle  of  Monte  Cassino  Leo  was  hard 
pressed  for  space.  The  long  form  of  i  is  certainly  not  the 
most  economical.  Yet  in  all  the  pages  of  small  and  crowded 
writing  the  above  rules   are  carefully  observed. 

We  have  seen  that  in  at  least  two  scripts  i-longa  was  a 
constant  feature  for  several  centuries.  In  this  respect  the  Visi- 
ffothic  and  Beneventan  are  different  from  other  hands.  We 
have  also  seen  that  the  use  of  i-longa  in  both  these  schools 
was  governed  practically  by  the  same  rules  (rules  which  al- 
ready obtained  in  the  7^^  and  8^^  century  documents)  and  that 
of  the  two  the  Visigothic  showed  stricter  adherence  to  the 
rules.  The  question  which  naturally  arises  —  and  it  is  one 
of  no  little  interest  to  palaeography  —  is  this:  did  the  Visi- 
gothic serve  as  a  model  to  the  Beneventan?^) 

If  it  were  not  for  the  fact  that  nearer  and  more  likely 
models  existed,  the  answer  to  the  above  question  would  have 
to  be  an  unqualified  affirmative,  considering  the  importance 
and  vogue  of  Spanish  literature  in  the  8*^  century  just  when 
the  Beneventan  script  was  springing  into  life.  But  the  south 
Italian  minuscule  could  easily  borrow  the  use  of  i-longa 
from  its  own  notarial  products;  and  if  it  went  farther  for  its 
models,  north  or  central  Italian  documents  as  well  as  MSS  of 
the  7*^  and  8*^  centuries  could  have  supplied  them.    This  being 


^)  The  reverse  is  out  of  the  question,  since  the  Beneventan  as  a 
script  was  just  beginning  its  existence  when  the  Visigothic  had  already 
reached  maturity. 


*x 


.< 


the  case,  and  as  no  actual  proof  exists  that  the  Beneventan 
took  over  the  practice  of  i-longa  or  any  other  calligraphic 
feature  from  Spanish  calligraphy,  it  is  more  reasonable  to  ex- 
plain the  matter  somewhat  thus:  as  the  Beneventan  has  many 
cursive  elements  which  are  not  found  in  Visigothic,  the  pre- 
sence of  i-longa  must  be  regarded  in  the  same  light  as  the 
presence  of  the  other  cursive  elements,  namely  as  a  remnant 
of  the  traditional  Italian  minuscule  in  which  cursive  features, 
adapted  to  calligraphic  purposes,   played  a  large  role. 

If  it  is  true  that  the  Beneventan  does  not  depend  upon 
the  Visigothic  for  its  use  of  i-longa,  the  same  can  be  said 
with  even  greater  emphasis  of  the  north  Italian  schools.  For 
if  we  assume  for  a  moment  for  the  sake  of  argument  the  direct 
dependence  of  north  Italian  upon  Spanish  MSS  with  regard  to 
this  point,  we  are  at  a  loss  to  explain  the  same  use  of  i-longa 
in  contemporaneous  north  Italian  documents.  And  no  one 
would  try  to  maintain  that  Italian  notaries  copied  from  the 
Spanish.  The  opposite  is  not  only  more  probable,  but  doubt- 
less was  the  case.  The  Spanish  notary  built  upon  Roman 
tradition;  his  model  was  the  Italian  notary.  The  knowledge 
of  the  i-longa  w^hich  the  Spanish  notary  had  he  owes  to  his 
Italian  cousin.  The  knowledge  of  it  possessed  by  the  Spanish 
scribe  is  doubtless  knowledge  gained  from  the  notary.  And  the 
same  conditions  which  made  the  Spanish  scribe  turn  to  cursive 
for  new  material  also  made  the  north  Italian  scribe  borrow 
from  cursive.  And  that  he  really  did  so  can  best  be  illus- 
trated by  two  concrete  examples.  It  is  impossible  not  to 
realize  the  points  of  similarity  between  the  Ambrosian  Josephus 
on  papyrus  of  the  7^^  century  and  the  Ravenna  documents  of 
about  the  same  period.  It  would  almost  seem  that  the  calli- 
grapher  in  this  case  also  filled  the  post  of  notary.  The  fact 
that  interests  us  now  is  that  the  Ambrosian  MS,  whose  style 
is  little  removed  from  a  cursive  document,  uses  the  i-longa 
regularly  at  the  beginning  of  a  word  and  medially  when  semi- 
vocal,  i.  e.  precisely  in  the  manner  of  later  Spanish  scribes  and 
notaries.    The  Ravenna  notary  certainly  did  not  learn  from  the 


S 


12 


12.  Abhandlung:  E.  A.  Loew 


V 


Studia  palaeographica. 


13 


Spanish;  nor  was  the  scribe  of  the  Amhrosianus  under  any 
obligation  to  a  Spanish  scribe;  for  even  the  existence  of  a 
Visigothic  minuscule  at  that  date  can  only  be  assumed,  not 
demonstrated.  But  a  more  cogent  example  is  that  furnished 
by  the  8^^  century  north  Italian  MS  Vercelli  183  (see  plate  1). 
Several  other  MSS  —  for  instance,  those  from  Bobbio,^)  — 
might  also  be  pressed  into  service  to  illustrate  my  point.  But  I 
single  out  Vercelli  183  because  its  north  Italian  origin  as  well 
as  its  dependence  upon  notarial  writing  is  practically  demon- 
strable. First  of  all  the  general  impression  of  the  script  bears 
distinct  resemblance  to  the  writing  in  north  Italian  documents 
of  the  Lombard  regime,  the  main  difference  being  that  the  MS 
is  orderly  and  calligraphic,  and  manifestly  the  work  of  an 
expert  scribe.  But  the  scribe  attempted  to  use  a  certain  form 
of -s*  (cf.  plate  I,  line  11)  which  is  almost  unique  in  MSS.^)  This 
form  of  the  letter,  however,  is  not  rare  in  north  Italian  docu- 
ments of  the  S^^  century.  Here  we  have,  as  it  were,  caught 
the  scribe  in  the  act  of  appropriating  a  cursive  element.  Now 
this  scribe  makes  constant  and  regular  use  of  i-longa  initially, 
and  medially  when  semi-vocal.  The  contemporaneous  north 
Italian  notary  does  precisely  the  same.  Far  from  explaining 
this  fact  as  due  to  the  influence  of  Spanish  models  —  and  it 
is  important  to  note  that  both  the  abbreviations  and  the  ortho- 
graphy show  no  trace  whatever  of  Visigothic  influence  —  the 
above  considerations  force  us  to  admit  that  the  writer  of  Ver- 
celli 183  merely  took  over  i-longa  as  he  did  the  singular  form 
of  ^,  from  the  cursive  writing  practiced  in  his  region. 

The  use  of  i-longa,  therefore,  in  all  the  schools  is  due 
merely  and  entirely  to  the  influence,  mediate  or  immediate, 
of  cursive  upon  calligraphic  writing.  With  this  in  mind,  we 
can  easily  understand  how  the  Caroline  reform  which  banished 
cursive  elements  from  the  book  hand,  was  inimical  to  the  use 
of  i-longa;  also,  how  its  use  happened  to  remain  a  feature  of 


•^, 


\ 


\ 


> 


*)  See  below  the  list  of  Italian  MSS. 
')  See  below,  p.  26  sqq. 


] 


Beneventan  writing,  which  is  par  excellence  the  script  which 
calligraphicized  cursive  elements ;  and  lastly  how  two  such  distant 
schools  as  the  north  Italian  and  the  Spanish  used  the  i-longa 
in  precisely  the  same  way.  Maffei's  view  of  the  common  origin 
of  the  different  types  of  minuscule  is  instructively  borne  out 
by  the  results  of  this  little  investigation  of  the  use  of  i-longa. 

i-longa  and  philology. 

Heretofore  our  considerations  have  been  purely  palaeo- 
graphical;  but  the  question  has  also  its  practical  side. 

Some  of  our  important  authors  have  come  down  to  us 
through  the  medium  of  Beneventan  or  Visigothic  transmission. 
When  such  a  text  depends  mainly  upon  a  single  MS,  and  that 
MS  is  in  a  bad  state  of  preservation  —  I  need  only  mention 
the  Annales  and  Historiae  of  Tacitus,  Varro's  de  Lingua  Latina 
and  the  fragments  of  Hyginus  in  Beneventan  writing  —  its 
editor  will  not  fail  to  profit  from  the  rules  formulated  above 
(cf.  p.  8  sq.).  For  some  of  the  errors  which  creep  into  the  text 
are  manifestly  due  to  ignorance  of  these  rules.  No  less  a 
philologian  than  Halm,  in  his  edition  of  the  fragments  of  Hy- 
ginus (Monacensis  6437)  misread  i-longa  for  an  I.  His  un- 
familiarity  with  another  rule  in  Beneventan,  that  of  the  lig- 
ature n,  was  the  cause  of  two  errors  in  one  word.  Halm 
gives  malorum  where  the  scribe  wrote  maiori^)  with  i-longa 
as  is  required  by  the  rules  of  his  school. 

In  a  passage  in  the  Historiae  of  Tacitus  (IV,  48,  10)  editors 
have  wavered  between  the  readings  ius  and  uis.^)  Its  last 
editor,  Andresen,  gives:  legatorum  ius  adoleuit.  The  Ben- 
eventan MS  upon  which  the  text  is  based  (Floren.  Laur.  68,  2) 
is  hardly  legible  on  that  page  as  the  ink  has  grown  very  pale. 
It  was  in  fact  illegible  in  the  time  of  the  humanists,  as  appears 


1)  Cf.  Kellogg,  in  Amer.  Journal  of  Philology  XX  (1899)  411. 

2)  Cf.  Andresen,  In  Taciti  Historias  studia  critica  et  palaeographica 
II  (1900)  p.  13. 


s 


/ 


14 


12.  Abhandluncr:  E.  A.  Loew 


^\ 


Studia  palaeographica. 


15 


from  the  interlineal  transcription  of  the  text.^)  But  the  two 
words  are  impossible  to  confuse  in  Beneventan,  for  ius  must 
be  written  with  i-longa  and  ^ds  must  begin  with  a  short  letter. 
The  MS,  even  in  its  present  state,  shows  plainly  that  the  first 
letter  was  short,  in  which  case  the  correct  reading  is  uis  and 
not  ius  —  correct  at  least  palaeographically.^) 

The  resemblance  of  i-longa  to  the  letter  I  could  not  but 
become  a  stumbling-block  to  ancient  copyists  in  whose  schools 
i-longa  was  not  a  rule.  After  the  9*''  century  a  continental 
scribe  copying  from  a  Beneventan  or  Visigothic  original  could 
easily  mistake  aiebat  for  aJehat,  maias  for  ynalas,  obiedat  for 
obledat  etc.  Consequently  editors  must  be  mindful  of  this 
source  of  error,  particularly  if  there  is  reason  to  believe  that 
the  archetype  was  Visigothic,  Beneventan  or  in  early  pre- 
Caroline  minuscule.^) 

The  fact  that  i-longa  did  service  for  semi-vocal  i  in  Spanish 
and  Beneventan  calligraphy  may  in  a  measure  account  for  the 
relatively  frequent  confusion  of  i  and  g  in  the  MSS  of  those 
two  schools.  Owing  to  similarity  of  pronunciation  this  inter- 
chancre   is   by    no  means   uncommon    in  other  schools.*)     The 


^)  The  partial  disappearance  of  the  ink  is  noticeable  in  a  great 
number  of  Beneventan,  especially  Cassinese  MSS  of  the  lltl»  century. 
It  was  evidently  due  to  the  manner  of  treating  the  parchment  then 
practiced,  for  the  ink  has  grown  pale  on  one  side  of  the  leaf,  the  other, 
the  hair-side,  having  retained  the  ink  much  better. 

2)  Cf.  the  Leyden  reproduction  of  the  MS  in  the  De  Vries  series: 
Codices  Graeci  et  Latini  photographice  depicti,  torn.  VII,  2,  fol.  94^, 
col.  2,  line  21. 

3)  Cf  Tafel,  Die  "Dberlieferungsgeschichte  von  Ovids  Carmina  Ama- 
toria  (Miinchener  Diss.  1909)  pp.  27  and  36. 

*)  On  the  confusion  of  i  and  g  owing  to  the  similarity  of  sound 
see  the  following  works  whose  title  in  full  is  given  on  p.  16  n.  2:  Corssen, 
tJber  Aussprache  etc.  P,  12G8qq.;  Schuchardt.  Yocalismus  I,  65,  see 
p.  70:  "Im  gotischen  Alphabet  ist  G  —  J;  zu  des  Ulfilas  Zeit  mufi  also 
<7  vor  e  und  i  allgemein  wie  j  gelautet  haben";  Bonnet,  Le  Latin  de 
Gregoire  etc.,  p.  173  sq.;  Haag,  Die  Latinitat  Fredegars,  p.  867;  Carnoy, 
Le  Latin  d'Espagne  etc.,  p.  154  —  5. 


/- 


ancient  grammarians  had  already  treated  of  semi-vocal  i.^) 
And  the  interchange  between  semi-vocal  i  and  g  is  evidenced 
by  inscriptions,  e.  g.  GEN  for  IAN  (VARIAS)  or  GEIUNA  for 
IEIUNA.2)  But  in  MSS  we  find  not  only  g  for  semi-vocal  i, 
but  also  i-longa  i.  e.  semi-vocal  i  for  g.^)  The  latter  type  of 
error  seems  to  me  less  likely  in  a  script  in  which  the  semi- 
vocal  i  has  not  a  distinct  graphic  form.  It  is  the  presence  of 
the  graphic  distinction  between  semi-vocal  and  vocal  i  which 
often  occasions  the  use  of  i-longa  for  g  on  the  part  of  the  Visi- 
gothic and  Beneventan  scribes.  I  cite  the  following  examples 
from  Beneventan  MSS: 

Monte    Cassino    332,    saec.  x,    p.  13    dilesta    for  digesta, 

p.  38  quadralesime ; 
Floren.  Laur.  S.  Marco  604,  saec.  xi,   conlule  for  coniuge; 
Monte  Cassino   289,   saec.  xi,  agebat   for  aiebat,  progecit 

for  proiecit; 
Oxford  Bodl.  Canon.  Class.  41,  lulera  for  iugera; 
Monte  Cassino   303,   saec.  xi,  in.  lesserunt    for  gesserunt; 
Floren.  Laur.  68,  2  (Tacitus),  saec.  xi,  lestus  for  gestus  etc. 

The  confusing  of  semi-vocal  i  and  g  is  not  as  familiar  to 
editors  as  one  might  expect.  An  instructive  case  in  point  has 
been  kindly  brought  to  my  attention  and  has  since  been  pub- 
lished by  the  Reverend  Dom  De  Bruyne.*)  He  points  out  that 
in  the  important  MS  Jc  of  the  gospels  (Turin  G  VII,  15)  the 
passage  Mark  XV,  11  is  thus  given:  'sacerdotes  autem  et 
scribae  persuaserunt  populo  ut  magis  agcrent  barabbam  di- 
mitte  nobis'.     Puzzled  by    the  word  agerent    some   editors,    as 


? 


^)  Cf.Keil,  Gram.  lat.  I,  13;   VI,  333;   Isidor.  Etymol.  I,  27,  11. 

2)  C.  1.  L.  V,  1717;  XII,  2193,  934,  3189,  649  etc.  See  also  Pirson, 
La  langue  des  inscriptions  latines  de  la  Gaule,  p.  75:  'Ti-longa  ayant 
fini  par  tenir  lieu  du  jod  dans  les  documents  de  la  decadence". 

^)  The  use  of  g  for  j  in  Visigothic  Verona  89  was  noted  by  the 
editors  of  the  Nouveau  Traite  (III,  449  nota). 

*)  Cf.  Revue  Benedictine  XXVIl  (1910)  498. 


> 


16 


12.  Abhandlung:  E.  A.  Loew 


Burkitt  and  H.  v.  Soden,  rejected  it  altogether  and  substi- 
tuted dicerent;  another  editor,  W.  Sanday,  explained  agerent 
as  used  in  a  "special  sensed  'But  the  original  reading  was 
manifestly  aierent.'^) 


11. 

Assibilation  of  ti.     The  ti-distinction. 

As  there  were  two  distinct  sounds  of  ti,  methods  were  in 
time  adopted  by  both  scribes  and  notaries  of  graphically  mark- 
ing the  difference  of  pronunciation. «)  In  some  schools  the  dis- 
tinction  between  soft  and  hard  tl  came  to  be  represented  by 
two  different  forms.  Where  that  did  not  happen,  cl  often  did 
service  for  assibilated  ti.  The  practice  of  the  various  centres 
in  this  respect  is  on  the  whole  sufficiently  consistent  to  allow 
us  at  times   to  derive  ideas    of  the  provenance    of  a  MS  by  a 


1)  Another  instance  cited  by  De  Bruyne  is  that  of  agis  for  ais 
which  also  proved  a  source  of  worry  to  two  editors.  Cf.  1.  c,  p.  498 
There  are  other  biblical  passages  where  the  confusion  occurs  m  parts 
of  the  verb  aio.  Cf.  Wordsworth  and  White,  Novum  Testaraentum  I,  7o7. 
Bonnet  (1.  c,  p.  173)  mentions  similar  corruption  in  the  texts  of  Gregory's 
Historia  Francornm. 

2)  On  the  phonetic  value  of  assibilated  ti  and  its  interchange  with  ci 
see-  Corssen,  tJber  Aussprache,  Vokalismus  und  Betonung  der  lateinischen 
Sprache  ^  (18n8)  22  sqq.  The  second  edition,  1868-70.  1  did  not  have 
at  hand;  Schuchardt,  Der  Vokalismus  des  Vulgarlateins  1(1866)  155  sqq, 
III  (1868)  317-  Joret,  Du  c  dans  les  langues  romanes  (Pans  1874)  p.  66 sqq.; 
Seelmann,  Die  Aussprache  des  Lateins  (Heilbronn  1885)  p.  320;  Bonnet, 
Le  latin  du  Gregoire  de  Tours  (Paris  1890)  p.  170  sqq.  and  p.  751  1  assi- 
bilation de  ci  et  ti  est  un  fait  accompli''  scil.  in  the  time  of  Gregory 
of  Tours.  See  also:  Haag,  Die  Latinitat  Fredegars,  in  Romanische 
Foischungen  X  (1899)  864 sq.;  Pirson,  La  langue  des  inscriptions  latines 
de  la  Gaule  (Brussels  1901)  p.  71  sqq.;  Carnoy,  Le  latin  d'Espagne  d'apres 
les  inscriptions  (Brussels  1906)  p.  141  sqq.;  see  also  Meyer-Liibke  m 
Grobers  Grundrifi  der  romanischen  Philologie  I  (Strafiburg  1904-6)  4/5. 


Studia  palaeographica. 


17 


study  of  its  ti  usage.  This  point  has  heretofore  received  less 
attention  than  it  merits.^) 

As  I  shall  often  have  occasion  to  speak  of  assibilated  and 
unassibilated  ti^  it  is  advisable  to  make  the  points  clear  at 
the  outset. 

The  difference  in  the  pronunciation  between  assibilated 
and  unassibilated  ti  may  already  be  observed  in  Roman  inscrip- 
tions of  the  2°^  century.^)  The  question  received  due  attention 
from  the  grammarians.  We  have  longer  or  shorter  treatment 
of  it  by  Consentius^),  Pompeius*),  Servius  in  his  commentary 
of  Donatus^),  Papirius^)  and  Isidore"^).  Other  anonymous  gram- 
marians of  the  later  middle  ages  also  touched  upon  the  sub- 
ject.^) I  select  for  quotation  the  passage  from  Papirius  who 
wrote  about  400  A.  D.: 


1)  In  giving  the  arguments  against  the  Italian  origin  of  the  famous 
Missale  Gallicanum  from  Bobbio  (now  Paris  13  246)  Traube  never  men- 
tioned the  fact  that  such  spelling  as  PoHcio,  tercia  etc.  was  un-Italian 
and  particularly  typical  of  French  MSS  of  that  time.  Cf.  L.  Traube, 
Palaographische  Bemerkungen,  in  Facsimiles  of  the  Creeds,  edited  by 
A.  E.  Burn,  p.  45  sq. 

2)  Cf.  Ferd.  Schultz,  Orthographicarum  Quaestionum  Decas,  Brauns- 
berger  Programm,  Paderborn  1855;  and  E.  Hiibner,  Neue  Jahrbiicher 
LVII,  339  sq. 

3)  Keil,  Grammatici  Latini  Y,  395. 

*)  Keil,  1.  c.  V,  104;  V,  286.    I  quote  this  excerpt:  "fit  hoc  vitium 

(iotacismus),  quotiens  post  ti  vel  di  sequitur  vocalis ubi  s  littera 

est,  ibi  non  possumus  sibilum  in  ipsa  i  littera  fa  cere  quoniam  ipsa  syllaba 
a  litteris  accepit  sibilum  etc.". 

^)  Keil,  1.  c.  IV,  445  "iotacismi  sunt,  quotiens  post  ti  vel  di  syl- 
labam  sequitur  vocalis  etc.".     See  also  Keil,  1.  c.  V,  327. 

«)  Keil,  1.  c.  VII,  216.  For  this  citation  I  am  indebted  to  Dr.  P. 
Lehmann. 

'^)  Etymologiae  I,  cap.  27,  28  =  Migne,  Patrolog.  Lat.  82,  col.  104, 
"y  et  z  litteris  sola  Graeca  nomina  scribuntur.  Nam  justitia  z  litterae 
sonum  exprimat,  tamen,  quia  Latinum  est,  per  t  scribendum  eat.  Sic 
militia,  malitia,  neqiiitia  et  caetera  similia". 

8)  Cf.  Thurot,  Notices  et  Extraits  des  MSS  etc..  Vol.  XXII,  part  2 
(1869)  p.  78,  who  gives  the  following  excerpt  from  the  10*^  cent.  MS  Paris 
7505.  "Nunquam  enim  T  ante  duas  vocales,  I  post  ipsam,  priore  non 
Sitzgsb.  d.  philos.-pliilol.  u.  d.  hist.  Kl.  Jahrg.  1910,  12.  Abb.  2 


r 


^^  12.  Abhandlung:  E.  A.  Loew 

''Justitia  cum  scribitur,  tertia  syllaba  sic  sonat,  quasi 
constet  ex  tribus  litteris  /,  z  et  /,  cum  habeat  duos,  t  et  i. 
Sed  notandum  quia  in  his  syllabis  iste  sonus  littorae  z 
inmixtus  inveniri  tantum  potest,  quae  constant  ex  t  et  i 
et  eas  sequitur  vocalis  quaelibet,  ut  tatius  et  otia  justitia 
et  talia.  Excipiuntur  quaedam  nomina  propria,  quae  pere- 
grina  sunt.  Sed  ab  his  syllabis  excluditur  sonus  z  litterae, 
quas  sequitur  littera  L  ut  otii  iustitii,  item  non  sonat  z\ 
cum    syllabam  ti   antecedit   littera  s,   ut  istius   castius.'"^) 

The  statement  of  Papirius  describes  exactly  the  method 
of  distinguishing  the  two  sounds  of  ti  which  was  followed  by 
mediaeval  scribes  and  notaries  as  far  as  that  method  can  be 
derived  from  graphic  distinctions.  There  is  only  this  difference: 
in  the  case  of  ti  followed  by  i  no  exception  was  made.  The 
rule  was  simply  this: 

ti  before  any  vowel  has  the  assibilated  sound.  When 
preceded  by  the  letter  5,  ti  has  the'  unassibilated  sound.*) 


tamen  s  precedente  venire  potest  ut  species,  glades  .  .  .  ocium  spacium 
.  .  .  tercius  nisi  sint  primitiva  a  quibus  T  retineat,  ut  scientia  a  sciente 
sapientia  a  sapiente  etc.  On  same  page  '7  ergo  «  precedente  sonum  non 
immutat,    ut  molestia,   modestia,   itstio,  quaestio  etc.".   Cf.  also  p.  144-5. 

^)  See  preceding  page,  note  6. 

2)  In  his  Praefatio  (p.  IX)  to  the  Leyden  reproduction  of  the  Medi- 
cean  Tacitus  (Flor.  Laur.  68,  2)  Prof.  Rostagno  tried  to  formulate  the  rule 
governing  the  use  of  the  two  kinds  of  ti,  but  he  was  not  successful  be- 
cause he  failed  to  realize  that  it  was  a  case  of  graphically  representing 
a  phonetic  distinction  as  appears  from  his  words :  "subeunte  enim  vocali, 
ti  litterae  uno  ductu  (i.  e.  our  ti  ligature  which  in  Beneventan  is  reserved 
for  the  assibilated  sound)  per  compendium  scriptae  exstant,  exceptis  qui- 
dem,  ut  par  est,  comparativis  adjectivorum  in  —  estus  -  ustus  desinen- 
tium,  ut  iustjor  f.  IK  A.  XII,  40,  7  etc.  Cf.  questjorc  f.  9v,  XII,  26,  1,  et  ita 
passim".  The  reason  why  the  Beneventan  scribe  used  the  ordinary  ti 
in  the  above  examples  is  explained  in  the  citations  from  Papirius.  The 
scribe  also  wrote  istius  and  hostium  with  the  ordinary  ti  for  the  same 
reason  that  he  thus  wrote  iustior  and  quaestiore,  i.  e.  for  phonetic  reasons, 
since  ti  followed  by  a  vowel  is  unassibilated  when  an  s  precedes.  The 
statement  in  Muiioz  y  Rivero's  Paleografia  Visigoda,  p.  105,  is  inexact 
and  suggests  that  he  also  missed  the  essential  point  in  the  matter. 


Studia  palaeographica. 


19 


As  will  be  seen  from  MS  evidence  adduced  below  many 
centuries  had  to  pass  before  the  phonetic  distinction  between 
the  two  sounds  of  ti  was  graphically  reproduced.^) 

The  Ligature  ti.     Its  Forms. 

In  rapid  writing  the  letter  t  particularly  lends  itself  to 
combination  with  the  following  letter.  The  cross-beam  of  t, 
by  being  drawn  down,  readily  forms  part  or  even  the  whole  of 
the  next  letter.  The  ligatures  te,  tu,  tr  and  ta  amply  illustrate 
this  tendency,  but  whereas  they  furnish  examples  of  partial 
coincidence,  we  have  in  the  ligature  %  complete  coincidence, 
since  the  continuation  of  the  cross-beam  constitutes  the  letter  i. 
Cursive  t  standing  by  itself  would  look  thus:  cC.  By  drawing 
down  the  horizontal  stroke  without  removing  the  pen  we  ^q\  8 
Thus  arose  a  form  which  plays  an  interesting  part  in  Latin 
palaeography. 

There  are  several  w^ays  of  forming  the  ligature  §.  It  may 
be  made  in  t^vo  strokes,  or  without  removing  the  pen.  The 
latter  way  is  more  usual  in  cursive,  the  former  in  MSS.  An 
analysis  of  the  ligature  shows  that  the  upper  arc  or  semi- 
circle corresponds  to  the  cross-beam  of  the  t,  and  that  the 
point  where  the  curves  meet  corresponds  to  the  point  where 
the  vertical  and  horizontal  strokes  of  the  t  meet.  In  some 
cases  the  scribe  or  notary  begins  with  this  point  of  juncture. 
First  the  lower  half-curve  is  made,  then  the  pen  is  placed  at 
the  initial  point  and  the  upper  loop  with  its  tail  or  continu- 
ation is  formed.  In  either  cases  the  pen  starts  at  the  top  and 
forms  larst  the  two  half-loops,  like  broken  c,  then  the  pen  is 
placed  at  the  same  point  and  the  vertical  line  representing 
the  cross-beam  of  t  and  the  letter  i  is  traced.  If  made  without 
removing  the  pen,  the  ligature  began  at  the  point  where  the 
two  curves  join,    but   after  forming    the   lower  curve    the  pen 


')  The  spelling  ci  for  ti  is  much  older  than  the  conscious  attempt 
to  represent  the  two  sounds  of  ti  by  two  distinct  forms.  But  ci  for 
soft  ti,  instructive  as  it  is  phonetically,  is  after  all  misspelling. 


20 


12.  Abhandlung:  E.  A.  Loew 


was  not  lifted  up,  but  returned  to  the  starting-point  in  a  straight 
line,    then  continued    as  in  the  case    above,    thus  producing  a 

form  resembling  oj-     Another  form   of  the  ligature  ti   which 

deserves  mention  occurs  in  the  earliest  cursive  extant,  especially 
in  the  Ravenna  documents  and  later  in  Insular  MSS.  It  differs 
from  the  forms  already  described  in  lacking  the  upper  half- 
curve.     It  resembles   somewhat    the  letter  q   with  the  vertical 

stroke  extending  above  the  loop,   thus:   CI. 

Origin.  The  ligature  of  t  and  i  is  so  obviously  of  cursive 
origin  that  no  demonstration  of  the  fact  is  necessary.^)  It  is 
sufficient  to  remember  that  the  ligature  is  found  in  documents  as 
early  as  the  5*^  century  when  no  MS  used  it,  and  that  the  first 
MSS  which  show  the  ligature  are  practically  written  in  cursive. 

As  in  the  case  of  i-longa,  here  too  a  brief  survey  of  the 
manner  in  which  the  notaries  of  the  different  centres  used 
the  ligature  may  be  found  instructive,  for  the  light  thrown 
upon    the  relation    between    cursive    and   calligraphic   writing. 

Usage  in  Cursive.  A  form  of  the  /i-ligature  is  already 
found  in  the  well-known  letter  on  papyrus  (Pap.  lat.  Argent.  1) 
of  Strassburg.2)  It  is  used  regardless  of  the  sound:  scholas- 
^icos,  sugges^ione.  It  is  used  indifferently  in  a  document  of 
489  reproduced  by  Marini  (Papiri  Diplomatici,  pi.  6,  no.  82), 
The  celebrated  documents  of  Ravenna  of  the  6^^  and  7*^  cen- 
turies make  very  frequent  use  of  the  ligature  regardless  of  the 
ti-distinction:  designaif^s,  mancipa^ioni,  testis,  pre^o  etc.^) 

In  the  peculiar  uncial-cursive  of  the  6^''  century  which 
is  found  in  many  semi-uncial  MSS  as  marginalia,  the  ligature 
is  found:  uigin^i  in  Paris  12097;*)  ui^iatis,  u^ilitas  in  Lyon  523.^) 


^)  Not  all  ligatures  are  necessarely  cursive.  Combinations  of  o 
and  s,  u  and  .«?,  n  and  t  are  peculiarities  of  uncial  writing,  just  as  the 
combination  of  i  and  t  at  the  end  of  a  line  is  typical  of  Spanish  min- 
uscule, but  hardly  of  its  cursive. 

2)  For  facs.  see  p.  2,  note  2. 

')  Cf.  p.  3,  note  1. 

♦)  Facs.  Delisle,  Le  Cabinet  des  MSS,  pi.  Ill,  3. 

5)  Fac8.  Delisle,  Alb.  Pal.,  pl.  7. 


Studia  Palaeographica. 


21 


The  ligature  §  is  a  constant  feature  in  the  documents  of 
the  Lombard  regime.  It  is  used  indifferently:  ^bi,  uindi^onis, 
por^onem,  ex^nia^onem,  Ius^§a  etc.^) 

I  found  §  used  indifferently  in  several  8*^^  century  central 
Italian  documents  preserved  in  the  Archives  of  Lucca.^) 

In  the  Merovingian  documents,  how^ever,  %  is  rarely  used.^) 
I  noted  it  in  a  document  of  688:  quolibe§psa'  =  quolibet 
ipsa.*)  The  spelling  ci  for  assibilated  ti  is  the  rule  rather 
than  the  exception  in  these  documents.  In  some  diplomas  of 
Charlemagne  §  still  occurs  e.  g.  comi^bus,  institu^s  (a.  775); 
auctorita^s  (a.  775);  pala§o(a.  775);  pra^s,  tradi§onis(a.  782).^) 
It  is  only  rarely  to  be  seen  in  later  diplomas.  I  noted  trini- 
ta^s  in  one  of  the  year  902.  The  ligature  %  is  found  in 
St.  Gall  documents  of  752,  757,  772  and  797,  used  indifferently: 
agents,  pra^s,  dona^ionem  etc.^) 

The  reign  of  Charlemagne  may  be  said  to  mark  a  turning- 
point  in  the  history  and  function  of  the  ligature  ^.  The  in- 
fluence of  the  Caroline  reform  in  writing  drives  out  the  lig- 
ature. This  is  more  noticeable  in  France  than  in  Italy.  The 
notaries  of  Italy  however  begin  about  the  year  800  to  reserve 
the  ligature  for  the  assibilated  ti  —  a  practice  which  lasts 
for  centuries.  Thus  in  Tuscan  documents  ^  is  still  found  in  the 
11*^  century;''^)  in  southern  Italy  some  notaries  use  it  in  the  13**^ 
and  even  in  the  14*^  century,  always  for  assibilated  ti.^)     The 


^)  Bonelli,  op.  cit.  passim  see  p.  3,  note  3. 

2)  Examples  are  the  documents  *L  75,  a.  713— 4,  *N  100,  a.  773, 
*B  65,  a.  773,  *  G  46,  a.  807. 

^)  Facs.  Lauer-Samaran,  op.  cit.,  p.  4,  note  1. 

4)  Facs.  Arndt-Tangl,  Heft  P,  pl.  10. 

^)  Facs.  V.  Sybel  and  Sickel,  Kaiserurkunden  in  Abbildungen.  The 
five  diplomas  cited  are  reproduced  respectively  in  Lief.  I,  2;  Lief.  Ill,  3; 
Lief.  I,  3;  Lief.  I,  4  and  Lief.  I,  13. 

6)  Facs.  Arndt-Tangl,  Heft  III*,  pl.  71  and  Steffens,  Lat.  Pal.*  pl.  38. 

■^)  Facs.  Collezione  Fiorentina,  pl.  36  of  a  document  of  1013.  One 
of  the  earliest  instances  of  the  ligature  for  soft  ti  is  in  a  Pisan  doc- 
ument of  780,  facs.  Collez.  Fior.,  pl.  29. 

^)  Cf.  works  cited  p.  3,  note  4. 


22 


12.  A})handluno::  E.  A.  Loew 


o 


same  js  true  of  the  peculiar  script  of  the  papal  chancery.  We 
find  the  ligature  in  the  oldest  extant  documents  as  well  as 
in  papal  bulls  of  the  11*^  century  —  always  for  the  soft  sound 
of  ti.^)  As  soon  as  the  characteristic  script  is  supplanted  by 
the  papal  minuscule  the  ligature  disappears  and  somewhat  later 
the  ^-distinction.^)  The  same  is  true  of  the  cursive  written 
by  the  notaries  of  the  city  of  Rome  and  vicinity.^)  In  a  doc- 
ument of  1083  the  ^i-ligature  still  has  its  traditional  use;*)  in 
documents  of  tte  early  12**'  century  we  begin  to  miss  both  the 
liorature  and  its  distinctive  function.*) 

It  is  important  to  note  however  that  during  the  11*^  century 
we  find  in  documents  of  northern  Italy  and  Ravenna  a  ligature 
of  ci  which  is  strikingly  like  the  ligature  of  ti.  That  the  ligature 
represents  ci  and  not  ti  is  established  beyond  a  doubt  by  the  cir- 
cumstance that  when  the  same  word  is  used  in  the  same  doc- 
ument by  a  hand  writing  ordinary  minuscule  or  when  it  is 
repeated  by  means  of  tachygraphic  signs,  ci  is  used  and  not  ti.^) 


1)  See  facs.  in  Pflugk-Harttung,  op.  cit.,  p.  3,  note  5.  A  papal  bull 
of  1098  still  has  the  ligature.    Cf.  ibid.,  pi.  47. 

2)  For  I  noted  that  the  ti-distinction  is  carefully  observed  in  two 
documents  of  1127  and  1138  written  in  ordinary  or  papal  minuscule. 
Facs.  Steffens,  Lat.  Pal.^  pi.  80  and  81*. 

5)  Facs.  Hartmann,  op.  cit.,  p.  3,  note  6  and  Fedele  in  Arch.  Pal. 
Ital.,  Vol.  VI  (1909)  fasc.  30  and  fasc.  34  (1910). 

*)  Hartmann,  op.  cit.,  pi.  26. 

^)  Hartmann,  op.  cit.,  pi.  27,  a.  1107   and  pi.  28,  a.  1110- 

6)  Professor  L.  Schiaparelli  who  has  kindly  called  my  attention  to 
this  fact,  furnished  me  with  these  examples:  a  document  of  Pa  via  of 
Dec.  1029,  now  in  the  Archives  of  Nonantola,  has  de^ma  (I  do  not  at-' 
tempt  to  give  the  exact  forms  of  the  ligature)  ti^nenso,  fa^as,  sancti 
quiri^,  and  the  tachygraphic  signs  give  queric/.  In  a  document  of  Pia- 
cenza  of  Dec.  31,  1007  we  have  Domini^  which  must  be  expanded  by  ci. 
Cf.  Schiaparelli ,  Tachigrafia,  Sillabica  (Rome  1910)  p.  38.  Other  doc- 
uments have  pec/a,  tert^a  in  tachygraphic  signs,  and  in  the  text  pe^a, 
ter^a.  Signor  Pozzi  who  is  working  upon  the  later  Ravenna  documents 
has  given  me  numerous  instances  of  the  ligature  for  ci  and  not  ti  in 
Ravenna  documents.  To  him  and  Professor  Schiaparelli  1  here  express 
my   warm  thanks. 


Studia  palaeographica. 


23 


The  Beneventan  notary  practices  the  ti-distinction  even  as 
early  as  the  end  of  the  8**'  century,^)  though  the  indifferent 
use  of  the  ligature  occurs  during  the  9*^  century.  Later  the 
notary  shows  the  same  care  in  distinguishing  the  two  sounds 
of  ti  as  the  scribe.  The  practice  lasts  as  long  as  the  peculiar 
script  remains  in  use.^) 

Spanish  notaries,  as  far  as  I  can  judge  from  an  examin- 
ation of  facsimiles,  observe  the  fi-distinction.  It  should  be 
noted  that  at  first  (during  the  8^**  and  9^^  centuries)  ^  serves  for 
assibilated  ti^  and  later,  that  is  during  the  10*^  and  11*^  cent- 
uries, qc)  performs  that  function  precisely  as  in  Visigothic  MSS. 
The  more  recent  Visigothic  documents  show  a  marked  ten- 
dency toward  employing  ci  for  soft  ti.^) 

So  much  then  to  give  an  idea  of  the  wide  use  of  ^  in 
documents  and  of  its  specific  function  in  many  of  them  since 
the  time  of  Charlemagne. 


Usage  in  MSS. 

We  are  now  ready  to  examine  its  use  and  function  in 
MSS.  This  examination  will  help  to  bring  out  the  closeness  of 
relationship  which  existed  between  cursive  and  calligraphic 
writing.  From  the  evidence  given  below  the  history  of  this 
ligature  and  of  the  ^i-distinction  in  Latin  MSS  may  be  sum- 
marized as  follows. 

In  the  oldest  MSS  in  uncial  and  semi-uncial  we  find 
neither  ^  nor  the  ^^-distinction.  In  the  earliest  French  min- 
uscule MSS  of  the  7"'  and  8*^  centuries   %  is  used  indifferently. 

It  is  still  found  in  some  MSS  of  the  Corbie  lcd  type,  but  the 
great  majority  of  them  do  not  employ  it.  In  a  number  of  MSS 
of  the  early  Caroline  epoch,    MSS  which    still  use  the  open  a 


1)  Cf.  Cod.  Diplom.  Cavensis  I,  pi.  1. 

2)  For  other  facsimiles  see  works  cited  p.  3,  note  4. 

3)  Cf.  Merino  and  Munoz  cited  p.  4,  note  4.    See  also  below,  part  IV, 
where  Spanish  usage  is  discussed. 


24 


12.  Abhandlung:  E.  A.  Loew 


Studia  palaeographica. 


25 


and  the  n-ligature,  the  form  §  is  still  to  be  found,  but  always 
used  indifferently.  With  the  spread  of  the  Caroline  minuscule 
its  use  gradually  dies  out.  It  is  scarcely  found  in  MSS  written 
after  the  beginning  of  the  9*''  century.  Its  presence  in  a  French 
MS  is  a  fair  hint  of  its  date. 

As  for  the  ^i-distinction  in  French  MSS,  the  practice  ap- 
parently never  took  root.  It  is  only  in  a  few  MSS  of  the 
8*^^  century,  and  only  in  portions  of  these,  that  the  attempt  to 
observe  the  distinction  is  noticeable.^)  Curiously  enough, 
^  stood  for  the  hard  sound  and  ordinary  ti  for  the  soft  sound 
of  ti.  Of  no  small  importance,  on  the  other  hand,  is  the  fact 
—  which  doubtless  stands  in  some  causal  relation  with  the 
absence  of  the  ti-distinction  —  that  ci  often  stood  for  soft  ti. 

The  ligature  §  is  manifestly  at  home  in  Italy.  We  find 
it  already  in  the  earliest  examples  of  Italian  minuscule  where 
(as  in  contemporaneous  documents)  it  is  used  indifferently  for 
both  the  soft  and  the  hard  sound.  At  about  the  end  of  the 
8*^  century  both  in  north  and  south  Italy  attempts  are  made 
to  observe  the  ti-distinction,  reserving  §  for  the  assibilated 
sound.  The  ligature  %  disappears  from  the  north  Italian  scrip- 
toria during  the  first  decades  of  the  9*^  century,  owing  to  the 
influence  of  the  Caroline  reform.  In  south  Italy,  on  the  other 
hand,  where  the  Caroline  reform  did  not  penetrate,  §  remained. 
Its  one  function  was  to  represent  assibilated  ti. 

In  Spanish  calligraphy  §  is  in  reality  but  a  makeshift, 
occuring  chiefly  at  the  end  of  a  line  because  space  was  wanting 
for  the  normal  ti.  To  make  the  distinction  between  the  two 
sounds  of  ti  other  means  were  used  (see  below,  Part  III).  As 
in  Beneventan,  here  too  ci  is  rare.  It  becomes  frequent  as 
soon  as  the  Visigothic  gives  way  to  the  ordinary  minuscule 
in   which  the  two  sounds  of  ti  are  not  differentiated. 

The  absence  of  such  spelling  as  nacio,  leccio  in  Beneventan 
and   Visigothic  MSS    is   directly    and   causally    related    to   the 


'i 


!» 


: 


\\ 


presence  of  distinct  forms  for  differentiating  the  assibilated 
and  unassibilated  ti.^)  Of  this  there  can  be  no  reasonable 
doubt. 

Insular  MSS  do  not  make  the  ^^-distinction.  The  form 
of  the  ligature  used  in  them  is  probably  of  semi-uncial  origin, 
and  is  found  in  MSS  posterior  even  to  the  9^*^  century. 


The  transcription  of  the  ligature. 

In  view  of  what  has  been  said  of  the  ligature  the  question 
of  how  it  should  be  transcribed  may  seem  gratuitous.  Yet  this 
is  not  the  case.  For  scholars  are  not  at  one  on  the  subject. 
There  are  those  who  transcribe  the  ligature  by  means  of  d.^) 
That  this  is  incorrect  is  proven  not  alone  by  the  origin  of 
the  ligature  which  is  simply  a  combination  of  t  and  i  but 
by  the  fact  that  for  generations  scribes  and  notaries  used  the 
ligature  in  words  like  satis,  tihi^  peccati  as  well  as  in  words 
like  natio  or  uenditio  etc.  There  are,  to  be  sure,  cases  where 
notaries  used  a  ligature  like  this  for  ci,^)  but  in  MSS  this  is 
hardly  possible.  That  in  Beneventan  the  ligature  may  never 
be  transliterated  by  ci  is  proven  by  the  fact  that  words  like 
provincia,  specie,  Decii,  socio,  atrocius  etc.  are  Avritten  with  ci 
and  practically  never  with  the  ligature.  We  see  then  that 
the  Beneventan   scribe   made    a  careful   distinction   between  ci 


»)  Cf.  MSS:  Paris  121G8;  Laoii  423;  Laoii  137;  Paris  8921. 


^)  This  observation  was  already  made  by  Mommsen  in  his  de- 
scription of  the  Beneventan  MS.  Vatic,  lat.  3342.  See  the  preface  to  his 
edition  of  Solinus,  p.  CIV,  where  he  quotes  Traube,  0  Roma  nobilis, 
p.  13,  note  7.     See  also  Bluhme  in  Pertz'  Archiv  V,  259. 

2)  Cf.  Federici's  description  of  Rom.  Casanat.  641  ^  in  Archiv. 
Paleot^r.  Ital.  Ill,  fasc.  22,  also  op.  cit.,  Vol.  III.  Notizie  dei  facsimili, 
p.  XIII,  published  in  1910.  I  find  the  ligature  transcribed  by  ci  in  the 
word  Translatio  occuring  on  fol.  31  of  the  Beneventan  MS  in  the  library 
of  H.  Y.  Thompson.  See  A  descriptive  catalogue  of  fift}'-  MSS  in  the 
collection  of  Henry  Tales  Thompson  (1898)  p.  87  sqq. 

3)  See  p.  22,  note  6. 


26 


12.  Abhandlung:  E.  A.  Loew 


Stiidia  palaeographica. 


27 


and  soft  ti.  And  the  fact  that  he  (as  well  as  the  Visigothic 
scribe)  possessed  a  special  way  of  writing  assibilated  ti  doubt- 
less accounts  for  his  rarely  writing  ci  for  ti,  so  that  such 
spelling  as  nacio,  leccio,  pocius,  which  fill  the  pages  of 
early  French  MSS,  are  practically  a  rarity  in  Beneventan 
or  Visigothic.^) 

The  transcription  of  the  ligature  ^  in  documents  was  some 
years  ago  the  subject  of  lively  dispute.^)  Without  entering 
the  discussion  I  may  state  that  I  hold  with  Lupi  against  Paoli 
that  the  ligature  §  should  be  rendered  by  ti  regardless  of 
what  its  probable  pronunciation  may  have  been.  When  such 
extraordinary  forms  are  encountered  as  ac^ione,  with  the 
superfluous  i,  or  a^Qo  in  which  the  ligature  has  plainly  the 
value  of  z  and  not  of  soft  fi,  the  editor  ought  to  call  attention 
to  that  fact. ^)  The  instance  just  mentioned  of  a§§o  for  az^o 
brings  up  an  interesting  question.  Is  it  not  possible  that  in 
such  a  case  we  have  perhaps  a  reminiscence  of  a  form  of  ^ 
which   vanished   in  time,    but  the  use    of  which   in  documents 


*)  There  is  a  form  of  t  in  Visigothic  which  strongly  resembles  c, 
one  must  therefore  be  skeptical  of  transcriptions  with  ci  for  soft  ti,  if 
the  MS  is  Visigothic. 

2)  Cf.  C.  Paoli,  Miscellanea  di  paleografia  e  diploniatica.  TI,  ZI,  Z 
in  Archivio  Storico  Italiano,  Serie  IV,  Vol.  16  (1885)  p.  284  sqq.;  C.  Lupi, 
Come  si  debba  trascrivere  il  nesso  TI,  in  Archiv.  Stor.  Ital.,  Ser.  IV,  Vol.  20 
(1887)  p.  279 sqq.;  ibid.  Paoli's  reply.  Paoli  transcribes  the  ligature  reg- 
ularly with  zi  when  it  is  assibilated.  Cf.  Collez.  Fiorent.,  plates  21 
and  29.  Other  Italian  diplomatists  transcribe  the  ligature  by  ii.  Cf.  Fedele, 
Archivio  della  R.  Societa  Romana  di  Storia  patria  XXI  (1898)  p.  464 
and  Schiaparelli,  Bulletin©  dell' Istituto  storico  Italiano.  No.  30  (1909) 
p.  53. 

3)  The  question  deserves  further  investigation.  I  learn  through  the 
courtesy  of  Dr.  F.  Schneider  that  this  strange  phenomenon  is  to  be  noted 
in  a  Tuscan  document  of  1043.  Cf.  Quellen  und  Forschungen  XI  (1908) 
p.  33.  Curiously  enough,  I  have  found  two  instances  of  superfluous  i 
after  the  ti  ligature  on  a  single  page  (uitiium,  quotiiens)  in  the  Ben- 
eventan MS  Paris  7530  (Monte  Cassino),  saec.  VIII  ex.  This  page,  fol.  222, 
is  being  reproduced  in  Part  1  of  the  Scriptiira  Bencventana. 


1 1 , 


of  the  8*^  century  is  fully  attested?  This  form  of  ^,  by  reason 
of  its  resemblance  to  the  usual  form  of  the  ligature  ti  has 
presented  considerable  difficulty  to  editors  who  usually  tran- 
scribe it  by  ti.  The  two  forms  are  made  precisely  alike  only 
that  the  ^   has  an  affix,    as  in  capital  Q,   which  consists  of  a 

wavy  line  made  from  left  to  right,  thus:  a    .    Examples  of  its 

use  are  to  be  seen  in  Bonelli,  Codice  Paleografico  Lombardo. 
As  this  feature  is  scarcely  known  I  give  here  some  instances, 
and  point  out  where  Bonelli  reads  erroneously. 


doc.  a.  748  Bonelli,  pi.  6,  line    5  pezola;  line  8  pezola  (Bonelli 
petiola), 

„        „    9,  line    9  peza, 
„        »  12,  line    1  zenoni  (Bonelli  tzenoni); 
line    2  pezola   (Bonelli  petzola), 
„        „  16,  line  15  florenzione     (Bonelli    Flor- 


doc.  a.  765 
doc.  a.  769 


doc.  a.  774        „ 
entione). 

Schiaparelli  (in  Bullet,  dell.  Istit.  Stor.  Ital.  1910,  No.  30) 
noted  this  curious  letter  in  two  documents,  and  even  called 
attention  to  the  difference  between  it  and  ordinary  §,  but  he 
did  not  feel  justified  in  transcribing  it  differently. 

doc.  a.  742,  pi.  1,  line    3  peza  (Sch.  petia), 
doc.  a.  758,  pi.  2,  line  15  pezola  (Sch.  petiola). 

A  fortunate  find  has  furnished  me  the  evidence  which 
establishes  to  a  certainty  that  this  form  is  to  be  regarded  as 
the  letter  ^  and  not  as  the  ligature  ti  with  a  meaningless 
appendage.    In  the  important  MS  Vercelli  183,  saec.  viii  (it  has 

ni  ==  nostri,  no  =  nostro,  nm  =  nostrum  etc.)  this  form  of  ^  occurs 
many  times. ^)  It  differs  from  the  ligature,  which  also  occurs 
continually  in  the  MS  only  in  the  matter  of  the  affix.  Ex- 
amples are:  f.  99^  ^elo:  f.  104^  e^ecMel,  acha^  etc. ;  f.  91^  ^osinio. 


1)  Cf.  Plate  1,  line  11. 


28 


12.  Abhandlunt? :  E.  A.  Loew 


The  regular  use  of  this  form  of  the  letter  ^  in  a  perfectly  calli- 
graphic book  furnishes  one  of  the  clearest  illustrations  of  the 
dependence  of  early  minuscule  upon  cursive.  The  scribe  of 
Yercelli  183  Avas  evidently  bold  in  employing  this  letter.  For 
it  appears  that  the  form  never  got  naturalized  in  calligraphy. 
On  careful  enquiry  I  find  that  Vercelli  183  is  practically  unique 
in  its  use  of  this  ^.  Through  the  kindness  of  Professor  Lindsay 
I  learn  that  in  a  fairly  similar  form  it  also  occurs  in  the 
north  Italian  8***  century  MS  Milan  Ambros.  C.  98  inf.  This 
form  of  the  letter  is  not  mentioned  in  our  texts  on  palaeo- 
graphy. 


-ft 

t 


Studia  palaeographica. 


29 


The  Evidence. 


a)  ti  in  Latin  MSS. 
b)  i-longa  in  Latin  MSS. 


\ 


•>^ 


1.  To  illustrate  the  usage  of  ti  and  i-longa  I  give  only  one 
or  two  typical  examples  which  I  noted  on  examining  the  MS. 
In  some  cases  I  have  had  to  depend  on  photographs.  To  dis- 
tinguish such  evidence  from  that  based  upon  a  study  of  the 
whole  MS,  I  prefix  an  asterisk  (*)  to  MSS    actually  examined. 

2.  The  form  of  %  used  in  the  examples  is  the  most  common. 
No  attempt  could  be  made  to  reproduce  the  different  varieties 
found  in  the  MSS. 

3.  By  §  used  indifferently  I  mean  that  the  ligature  is  not 
reserved  exclusively  either  for  assibilated  or  for  unassibilated  ti. 

4.  The  date  ascribed  to  a  MS  is  an  approximate  one. 
To  avoid  ambiguity  it  may  be  stated  that  saec.  vm  in.  = 
P*-  third  of  8^^  century ;  saec.  Ylil  ex.  =  last  third  of  the 
century;  saec.  vni  post  med.  =  2"^  half  of  the  century; 
saec.  vni/ix  =  ca.  800. 

5.  The  MSS  are  arranged  as  far  as  possible  according  to 
countries,  in  groups  which  present  common  graphic  features. 
It  is  hoped  that  this  attempt  at  classifying  MSS  in  early  Latin 
minuscule  will  prove  helpful.  Inexpensive  facsimiles  of  these 
MSS  will  be  made  accessible  to  the  student  in  an  extensive 
collection  now  in  press. 


) 


V) 


ii 


30 


12.  Abhandlung:  E.  A.  Loew 


Uncial  MSS. 

a)  In  the  oldest  type  the  ligature  %  is  not  found.  But  in 
the  more  recent  type  it  slips  in  occasionally  at  the  end  of  a 
line  for  lack  of  space,  e.  g.  *Lucca  490  saec.  viii/ix  in  the 
uncial  part:  paren§bus. 

b)  The  i-longa  is  lacking  in  the  oldest  type  of  uncial. 
However,  in  MSS  of  the  vii^'"  and  viu*'^  centuries  it  is  not  in- 
frequently used,  thus  showing  the  influence  of  notarial  upon 
calligraphic  writing,  e.  g.  Paris  1732:  In,  lelunio;  *Vatic. 
lat.  317  :  lelunii  passim,  i-longa  initially,  passim  by  one  scribe; 
*Vercelli  188  initially  passim;  Paris  13246:  In,  lelunauit, 
hulus  etc.     *  Vatic,  lat.  5007  (Naples):   In,  hulus  etc. 

Semi-uncial  3fSS. 

a)  In  the  oldest  kind  §  does  not  occur.  In  the  recent  type 
it  is  occasionally  found  at  the  end  of  a  line,    e.  g.  *Novara  84 

saec.  vnr. 

b)  i-longa  is  not  used  in  the  oldest  kind.  In  the  more 
recent  type  it  occurs,  e.  g.  Cambrai  470  initially  often ;  *Rome 
Sessor.  55  (2099):  In.  loseph,  malore;  Ambros.  S  45  sup.  often 
initially;  Lyon  523,  initially  passim;  *Vatic.  Regin.  lat.  1024 
(Spanish)  often  initially;  Autun  27  (Spanish)  often  initially: 
In,  ludaei,  Ipse,  Imago,  also  medially:  elus.  In  St.  Gall  722  it 
occurs  initially,  but  also  finally  after  t:  repletl.  In  Autun  24 
it  is  also  used  in  other  parts  beside  the  beginning:  Itlnerls  etc., 
in  this  respect  recalling  Merovingian  cursive. 

Early  French  Minuscule. 

Paris  8913         saec.  vii.         The  script   is  very  cursive. 

a)  g  is  rarely  used:  con^geret,  coUegis^s.  The  ordinary 
forms  of  t  and  i  are  used  for  both  the  soft  and  hard  sounds. 
But  ci  occurs  for  assibilated  ti\  hospicio,  sullercia. 

b)  Initially  often:  In,  Introeat,  luxta;  but  ilia,  ibi  with 
short  i. 


I 


Studia  palaeographica. 


31 


*Paris  17655         saec.  vii  ex.         The    writing   hardly    ditfers 
from  that  of  Merovingian  diplomas. 

a)  ^  used  indijfferently:  mon^um,  al^tudinem.  I  noted 
ci  for  assibilated  ti  in  the  uncial  portion:  commemo- 
racione  (f.  2). 

b)  Initially  and  medially:  In,  cuius,  elus;  occasionally 
short:  iniurias. 


*Paris  9427         Luxeuil  type,         saec.  vii/viii. 
Lectionarium  Gallicanum. 

a)  ^  used  before  a  consonant:  sa^s,  sta^m.  Assibilated 
ti  is  often  represented  by  ci:  pacientiam,  adnunciavi,  sici- 
antem,  leccio  etc. 

b)  Initially  and  medially:  In,  Ita,  Ille,  oblecit  etc. 

*Verona  XL  (38).^)    Same  type.    saec.  vii/viii. 

a)  §  occurs  for  assibilated  and  unassibilated  ti^  but  the 
ordinary  ti  is  more  usual:  senten^iam  and  sententiam; 
seme^psam  and  semet  ipsam,  tokens  and  fa^gat. 

b)  Initially  and  medially:  In,  lob,  Ipse,  Iste,  alt,  elus, 
lustum,  Indicium  etc.  but  illius  with  short  i. 

St.  Paul  in  Carinthia  MS  XXV^.     Same  type.    saec.  vii/viii. 

a)  5  used  indifferently:  sapien^a,  noc^bus;  scien^a, 
repen§na. 

b)  Occasionally  long  initially:  In,  but  ipse,  ilium,  eius 
with  short  i. 


M  Verona  XL  is  in  precisely  the  same  script  as  Paris  9427.  By 
means  of  internal  evidence  the  French  origin  of  the  Paris  MS  is  estab- 
lished beyond  a  doubt.  Graphic  features  point  to  France  also  as  the 
home  of  the  script,  since  it  resembles  French  cursive  much  more  than 
Italian.  Then  too,  the  style  of  ornamentation  and  the  orthography  — 
the  use  of  ci  for  assibilated  ti  —  strongly  favor  France.  These  con- 
siderations seem  so  grave  that  I  feel  justified  in  differing  with  Traube 
according  to  whom  the  Veronese  MS  was  written  in  Verona.  See  Vor- 
lesungen  und  Abhandlungen  II,  28.  There  seems  to  be  a  slight  incon- 
sistency in  this  passage  for  the  same  MS  is  spoken  of  as  a  "Kursivschrift 
eigener  Art"  and  then  again  as  an  example   of  "Scriptura  Luxoviensis". 


32 


12.  Abhandlunf? :  E.  A.  Loew 


Studia  palaeographica. 


33 


*Ivrea  1.    Same  type.    saec.  vii/viii. 

a)  §  used  for  assibilated  and  unassibilated  ti'.  inimi- 
ci^as  and  occults,  silen§o  and  u^lis.  The  ordinary  ti 
is  also  used  for  soft  ti:  etiam.  The  ligature  §  occurs 
for  a:  quanto^us,  ami ^§ as. 

b)  Initially  and  medially:  In,  Iterum,  Illius,  Idolatriam, 
Ipse,  Illos;  alt,  hulus,  conlugum  etc.,  yet  cuius  with  short  i. 

*London  Add.  MS  11878.     Same  type.     saec.  viii  in. 

a)  %  used  indifferently:  tempta^onis,  u^,  sen^t. 

b)  Initially:  In;  medially  not  always:  elus  but  cukis. 
*London  Add.  MS  29972.^)    Same  type.    saec.  viii  in. 

a)  9  used  indifferently:  quo ^ ens,  men^mur,  ^bi.  The 
ordinary  form  of  ti  is  also  used  for  assibilated    ti\  etiam. 

b)  Initially  the  rule;  medially  occasionally:  In,  cuius  etc. 
but  also  cuius.  

Fulda  Bonifatianus  2.    A  similar  type  of  writing  but  some- 
what  more  recent   than    that    of  the   preceding  MSS. 

a)  §  used  indifferently:  ra^o  and  ni^tur,  despera^onis 
and  praesen^s.  Frequently  ci  is  used  for  soft  ti:  uicia. 
A  corrector  changed  it  to  uitia. 

b)  Often  long  in  the  word  m,   but  not  always. 
Wolfenbiittel  Weissenb.  99.    Similar  type.    saec.  vin  in. 

a)  §  used  indifferently:  ressurec^onem,  u^que;  laeti^am, 
lus^.     ^  occurs  for  ci   e.  g.  suspi^onem. 

b)  Initially:  In,  Ihm,  lam,  lusti  even  lUe,  yet  ipsius 
w^ith  short  i. 

*Munich  29033  (fragment).       Similar  type.       saec.  viii. 
(Formerly  served  as  fly-leaves  of  Munich  14102). 

a)  §  used  indifferently:  tempta^o,  mit^t,  confes^im, 
bap^sta;  ci  occurs  for  assibilated  ti:  spacium.  Also  ^ 
used  for  d:  deli^osa. 

b)  Often  long  initially:  Iter,  Ingressus,  lam,  lussit;  but 
ille,  ipse,  iustus  with  short  i. 


^)  Similar  writing  maybe  seen  in  Vatic.  Regin.  lat.  317,  e.g.  the 
additions  on  ff.  31^',  180,  160^'  etc. 


\ 


*Admoiit  (Abbey)  Fragm.  Prophet.^)     Similar  type, 
saec.  VIII. 
a)  §    used    indifferently:    adflic^onis,    sabba^ ,    por^s, 
uic^mam  etc.;    ci  occurs    for   soft  ti:   poenitenciam,    con- 
tricione,   oblacionem  (corrected  to  oblationem). 

b^  Initially  otten;    occasionally   also  medially:    In,  Ipsa, 
luxta,  malestate ;  but  ibi,  illut,  ipse,  maiestas  with  short  i. 
Wtirzburg  Mp.  Theol.  Fol.  64 ^      Similar  type.      saec.  viii. 

a)  %  used  indifferently:  gen^um,  tribula§one,  gen^bus, 
ul^mum;  ci  occurs  for  soft  ti:  cognicio,  tribulacione,  per- 
secucionem,  adnunciate  etc. 

b)  Initially  occasionally  long,  more  often  short:  In, 
but  also  in,  iudicium,  huius  with  short  i. 

*Vienna  847  ff".  1^,  5^  G^.     saec.  viii. 

a)  §  occurs  for  the  hard  sound:  peccan§;  ci  is  often 
used  for  assibilated  ti:  accio,  legacio. 

b)  Initially  and  medially:  In,  lusticiam  etc. 

*Paris  12168.     «  type.     ca.  a.  750.      The  angularity  of  the 
two  parts    of  a  is  characteristic  of  this  group. 

a)  One  scribe  regularly  used  §  for  unassibilated  sound: 
res^§t,  procrea^s  and  ordinary  ti  for  assibilated:  otium, 
potius.^)  But  ci  often  occurs  for  soft  ti.  Another  scribe 
(after  f.  68)  uses  §  indifferently.  It  is  evident  that  the 
first  scribe  was  trying  to  make  a  strict  distinction  between 
assibilated  and  unassibilated  ti.  Curiously  enough,  the 
form  he  chose  for  hard  ti  became  in  other  schools  the 
regular  form  for  soft  ti. 

b)  Commonly  in  the  word  m,  otherwise  often  short: 
ita,  iudas. 


^)  The  fragments  show  two  contemporaneous  hands.  The  usage 
cited  is  true  only  of  one  scribe,  the  other  does  not  employ  the  ^^-ligature 
nor  the  same  form  of  a.  His  writing  makes  a  more  recent  impression 
and  most  likely  represents  the  more  modern  style.  The  same  scribe, 
1  believe,  wrote  the  biblical  fragments  now  in  Munich  (MS  29158). 

2j  My  attention  to  this  regularity  on  the  part  of  the  first  scribe 
was  called  by  Prof.  W.  M.  Lindsay. 


Sitzgsb.  d.  pbilos.-pUilol.  u.  d.  hist.  Kl.  Jahrg.  1910,  12.  Abh. 


8 


34 


12.  Abhimdlunj?:  E.  A.  Loew 


Studia  palaeographica. 


35 


*London  Add.  MS.  31031.     (Same  type.)*)     ca.  a.  750. 

a)  §  often  for  uiiassibilated  ti:  ads^^s,  §bi,  peccas^; 
ci  very  often  for  assibilated  ti:  inius^cie,   explanacio  etc. 

b)  Usually  short.  This  cursive  element  is  slowly  being 
eliminated  from   the  book  hand. 

Laon  423.     (Same  type.)      ca.  a.  750. 

a)  The  first  scribe  (jff.  1  — 17)  has  ^  for  unassibilated  ti 
and  ordinary  ti  for  assibilated:  supers^tiose,  inues^ga- 
tione  etc.  The  other  scribes  use  §  indiflPerently.  Here 
it  may  be  fair  to  suppose  that  the  first  scribe  was  con- 
sciously making  a  distinction  between  the  two  sounds  of  ti.^) 

Laon  137.     (Same  type.)     ca.  a.  750. 

a)  %  is  used  indifferently,  although  it  seems  that  here 
and  there    an  eftbrt   was  made    to  have  it   represent  only 
the  hard  sound,  e.  g.  pes§lentia,  res^tutione. 
*St.  Gall  214.      (The  /-type.)      saec.  vm. 

The  characteristic  letter  is  ?,  which  has  a  distinct 
bend  in  the  middle,  somewhat  like  broken  c.  The 
script  is  related    to  the  Corbie  ab  type.     See  p.  36. 

a)  §  not  used.  Ordinary  ti  is  used  for  assibilated  and 
unassibilated  ti,  but  ci  often  occurs  for  the  soft  sound: 
cicius,  perdicione. 

b)  Initially  often,  but  in,  impleri,  ignorat;  occasionally 
also  medially:   cuius,  elus. 

*London  Harley  5041.     (Same  type.)     saec.  viii. 

a)  %  not  used.  Ordinary  ti  for  assibilated  and  unassibil- 
ated sound. 

b)  Used  occasionally:  lam,  malor.  Often  short,  even 
in  the  word  in. 

Chateau    de    Trousseures.      Same   type.      saec.  viii. 

Nov.  Testam.      See  catalogue  of  sale,   pi.  2    (Paris, 
Leclerc,   1909). 


^)  To  judge  from  a  small  facsimile,  the  Cambridge  MS  Corpus 
Christi  College  K  8  belongs  in  this  class  of  MSS. 

2)  Knowledge  of  this  and  the  next  MS  1  owe  to  the  kindness  of 
Prof.  W.  M.  Lindsay. 


a)  §  occurs  for  hard  sound:  §bi;  ci  is  used  for  assibil- 
ated ii:  narracio,  depraecacio. 

b)  Initial  i  has  a  somewhat  longer  form:   In. 
*Paris  14086.     Similar  script,      saec.  viii. 

a)  ^  occasionally  for  assibilated  sound:  praesump^onis; 
but  ci  is  very  frequent  for  soft  ti:  senciant,  paenitenciam  etc. 

b)  Initially. 

*Berne  611.     Similar  script,     saec.  viii. 

a)  §  is  used  indifferently:  legen^um,  praeposi^onum, 
pon^fex;  ci  very  often  occurs  for  soft  ti:  noticiam,  moni- 
cione,  quociens.  Ordinary  ti  is  also  used  for  the  soft 
sound. 

b)  Initially  as  a  rule;  medially  occassionally :  In,  hulus, 
cuius;  but  also  eius  with  short  i.  Here  and  there  the 
i-longa  extends  below  the  line:  ejus,  jejunij. 

*Bamberg  B  V  13.      Similar  script.      saec.  viii/ix. 

a)  No  §.    No  distinction  between   the  two  sounds. 

b)  No  i-longa. 

*Paris  12598.      saec.  viii  ex. 

a)  §  used  for  unassibilated  ti,  ci  often  occuring  for 
assibilated:   ^bi,  pe^cionibus,  adfleccione. 

b)  Found  here  and  there  initially  and  even  medially: 
elus,  leluniis;  but  as  a  rule  i-longa  is  not  used. 

*Vienna  1616.      saec.  viii  ex. 

a)  §  used  for  unassibilated  ti:  u^,  bap^zatus,  casti- 
ta§s;  ci  often  occurs  for  assibilated  ti:  tristicia,  poncio, 
gencium,  damnacionis  etc. 

b)  Initially,  but  ilia  with  short  i;  medially  as  a  rule: 
malestas,  hulus,  lelunii,  lelunare  etc. 


Epinal  68.  saec.  viii  (a.  744).  A  type  of  pre-Caroline  minus- 
cule out  of  which  the  Caroline  developed.  The  cursive 
elements  are  few;  the  general  impression  is  that  of  a 
modified  semi-uncial. 


■ 


36  12.  Abhandlung:  E.  A.  Loew 

a)  g   seldom    occurs:     imperii ssimis;    no   distinction   is 
made,  but  ci  is  often  used  for  soft  ti:  laeticia,  uiciis, 

uiciata  etc. 

b)  Initially  and  medially  by  one  hand:  In,  lam,  elus- 
demetc;  short  i  initially  and  medially,  by  another.  The 
cursive  portion  has  i-longa.  The  use  of  i-longa  in  the 
body  of  the  word,  at  the  end  of  a  syllable  e.  g.  lacrl- 
marum  recalls  certain  semi-uncial  MSS  and  Merovingian 
cursive.  There  are  a  number  of  MSS  of  the  type  of 
Epinal  68. 

♦Oxford  Bodl.  Douce  f.  1  (fragments),  saec.  viii  post  med. 
This  script  is  the  immediate  precursor  of  the  Kb  type 
which  is  manifestly  only  a  further  development  of  it. 
Very  typical  is  the  letter  a  which  in  combination 
is  often  suprascript  and  has  the  first  curve  turned 
leftward  at  the  top.  Otherwise  the  a  is  shaped  like 
two  adjacent  c's.  The  b  has  already  the  form  found 
in  the  Corbie  MSS  of  the  ab  type. 

a)  %  used  indifferently:  poten^am,  securita^s.  Ordin- 
ary ti  is  often  used  for  the  assibilated  sound.  %  occurs 
for  a,  e.  g.  fa^at. 

b)  not  used:  in,  huius,  maiestatem  —   all  with  short  L 
*Vatic.  Regin.  lat.  316.      Same  script,      saec.  viii  post  med. 

The  MS  is  in  uncial,  but  several  lines  occur  in  this 
type  of  minuscule   on  if.  2^  and  46. 

a)  g    used:    substangalem,   tempta^one;    ci  occurs   for 

soft  ti:  tercia. 

b)  A  slightly  longer  form  of  i  occurs  initially:  In. 

Brussels  9850-52.      Corbie-script,^)    icb  type.     saec.  viii  ex. 

Most    of   the  MSS   of  this  type    are    of  the    early 

ninth    century,    a  few    are   of  the   end    of  the   8*^. 


Studia  palaeographica. 


37 


1)  The  name  originated  with  Traube. 


The   script   is  very    conventional   and  shows  a  high 
point  of  development. 

a)  ^   used  indifferently:  pa^en^ssima. 

b)  Initially  often,   but  not  medially. 

*Paris  3836.     (Same  type.)     saec.  viii  ex. 

a)  ^  used  indifferently:  sen^endum,  proba^s;  ci  often 
occurs  for  assibilated  ti:  racione,  penetenciam  etc. 

b)  Not  used  regularly. 

*Paris  8921.      (Same  type.)     saec.  viii  ex. 

a)  ^  is  not  used.  However  it  is  evident  that  the  dis- 
tinction between  the  two  sounds  is  striven  after.  When 
the  ti  is  assibilated  the  i  is  extended  below  the  line 
(as  later  in  Visigothic  MSS);  when  it  is  unassibilated  the 
usual  form  of  the  i  is  retained.  This  distinction  is  ob- 
servable in  many  parts  of  the  MS.  I  cite  these  examples: 
f.  31^  an^iocensis  but  cottinensis;  f.  32"^  e^iani  but  ex- 
titerit;  f.  45  deuo^ionis,  persecu^^onis  but  multis.  (Yet  I 
noted  nescieu^^bus);  f.  138^  Lauren^ms  but  surentinus;  pro- 
iectifius  but  hostiensis;  f.  140^  etiam  but  sanctitas.  ci  is 
not  infrequently  used  for  assibilated  ti, 

b)  Often  initially  and  medially:  huIus,  cuius  etc. 

Turin  D  V  3.      Same  type.      saec.  viii  ex. 

a)  §  occurs  for  unassibilated  ti:  omnipoten^s,  pro- 
sequen^s;  ci  is  used  for  assibilated  ti:  milicia,  pocius, 
racioni,  graciarum  etc. 

b)  Initially:    In,   lohannis;    not  medially:    huius,    cuius. 

*Paris  11627.      (Same  type.)      saec.  viii/ix. 

a)  No  %.    No  distinction. 

b)  Often  used,  but  not  regularly. 
*Paris  11 681.      (Same  type.)      saec.  viii/ix. 

a)  No  §.    No  distinction. 

b)  Only  occasionally. 

*Paris  12134.     (Same  type.)     saec.  viii/ix. 

a)  No.  §.     No  distinction. 

b)  Often  initially. 


38 


12.  Abhantlluni,' :  E.  A.  Loew 


Studia  palaeographica. 


39 


*Paris  12135.      (Same  type.)      saec.  viii/ix. 

a)  No  §.     No  distinction. 

b)  Occasionally. 

*Paris  12155.      (Same  type.)      saec.  viii/ix. 

a)  No  §.     No  distinction. 

b)  Used  irregularly. 

*Paris  12217.      (Same  type.)      saec.  viii/ix. 

a)  No  §.     No  distinction,     c'l  occurs  for  soft  ti. 

b)  Hardly  used. 

*Paris  13048.      (Same  type.)     saec.  vm/ix. 

a)  No  5.     No  distinction. 

b)  Often  initially,  but  irregularly. 

*Paris  13  440.      (Same  type.)     saec.  ix  in. 

a)  No  9.     No  distinction. 

b)  Rarely  used. 

*Paris  11529  —  30.      (Same  type.)      saec.  ix  in. 

a)  No  §.     No  distinction. 

b)  Often  used,  but  not  regularly. 

*Paris  17  451.      (Same  type.)      saec.  ix  in. 
a)  No  §.     No  distinction. 

*Paris  Nouv.  Acq.  1628  ff.  15—16.    (Same  type.)    saec.  ix  in. 
a)  No  §.     No  distinction. 

*Bamberg  B  III  4  fly-leaf.      (Same  type.)      saec.  ix  in. 
a)  No  ^.     ci  occurs  for  soft  ti. 

♦London  Harley  3063.      (Same  type.)      saec.  ix  in. 

a)  No  %.     No  distinction. 

b)  Used  initially;  not  medially. 

There  are  doubtless  many  other  French  MSS  of  the 
pre-Caroline  or  early  Caroline  epoch  —  it  would  hardly  be 
necessary  to  enumerate  them  even  if  I  were  able  to  do  so 
—  which  employ  %  indifferently.  Gradually,  however,  this 
cursive  element  altogether  disappears  from  the  book-script. 
The   i-longa,    especially    in   the  word   in  or  otherwise    at  the 


beginning  of  a  word  stays  longer  than  §.  But  it  too  was 
practically  rejected,  although  it  crops  up  here  and  there 
at  all  times. 

Early  Italian  Minuscule, 

*Milan  Ambros.   Josephus   on   papyrus.     (North  Italy.) 
saec.  VII. 

a)  §  used  indifferently:  repe^^one.  No  distinction  is 
made  between  soft  and  hard  ti, 

b)  Regularly  initially:  In,  Ipse,  Itaque;  even  lUud,  Die, 
Ibi;  medially  regularly  for  the  semi-vocal  sound:  pelor, 
hulus,  cuius,  alt,  Inlurias  etc. 

*Milan  Ambros.  C  105  inf.      (Bobbio.)     saec.  vii/viii. 

a)  9  used  indifferently:  prae^o,  merits,  reper^.  No 
distinction. 

b)  Initially  and  medially:  In,  Ipsa,  malorem  etc. 

*Naples  IV  A  8.      (Bobbio.)      saec.  vii/viii. 

a)  %  used  indifferently:  muni^onem,  sta^m.  Inno- 
cent us,  iacen^bus.     No  distinction. 

b)  Initially    and    medially:    In,   lacentibus,   prolecerunt. 

*Vienna  17.      (Bobbio.)      saec.  vii/viii.      See  preceding  MS  of 
which  it  formed  a  part. 

*Milan  Ambros.  D  268  inf.      (Bobbio.)     saec.  viii  in. 

a)  §  used  indifferently:  e^am,  uirtu^s,  men^s,  con- 
ten  §oni.     No  distinction. 

b)  Initially  and  medially:  Ihs,  Illud,  cuius,  malestatem, 
alt.  Where  the  scribe  had  made  it  short  initially,  the 
corrector  made  it  long. 

*Milan  Ambros.  C  98  inf.      (Bobbio.)     saec.  viii. 

a)  ^  used  indifferently:  digna^one,  sapien^bus.  No 
distinction. 

b)  Initially  the  rule,  even  Illo,  Ipso,  Ihs,  Ibi  etc.  Medi- 
ally not  always:  Inluria,  hulus,  malestate,  malor;  but 
also  huius,  eius. 


40 


12.  Abhandlung:  E.  A.  Loew 


*Vatic.  lat.  5763.      (Bobbio.)      saec.  viri. 

a)  g  used  indifferently:  no gg a,  con gnent.  No  distinction. 

b)  Initially:  Ignem,  Inter,  ludea;   medially  not  always: 
cuius  but  ejus  and  eius. 

Wolfenbtittel  Weissenb.  64.      (Bobbio.)      saec.  viii. 
This  MS  belonged  with  the  preceding. 

a)  9  used  indifferently:  to^us,  alterna^o,  gra^a,  noc^s, 
111 g mum,   gberis.     No  distinction. 

b)  Initially  the  rule:  Id,  Ipse,  Igne;  also  used  medially: 

cuius. 
Turin  A  II  2.      (Bobbio.)      saec.  viii. 

a)  9   used  indifferently:  prae^i,  ui^o,  ci^a,  ^bi,  gen^s. 

b)  Initially:    In,  lustis,   Ipse,  but  ille;   medially:  hulus, 
leluniis,  delnceps,  but  ejus. 

Turin  G  V  26.^)    fol.  5\     (Bobbio.)     saec.  viii. 

a)  ^  used  indifferently:  essen^a,  extan^bus. 

b)  Long  in  in  (no  other  words  occur). 
♦Milan  Ambros.  L  99  sup.      (Bobbio.)      saec.  viii. 

a)  g    used    indifferently:    stul^^a,    dis^ncgonem.     No 

distinction. 

b)  Initially    and    medially:    In,  Ipsa,   even  Illos;    hulus, 

sublectis,  alunt  etc. 
*Milan  Ambros.  B  31  sup.      (Bobbio?)      saec.  ix  in. 

a)  g  is  used  for  assibilated  fi.  but  ordinary  H  is  also 
thus  used:  ra^onis,  but  fluctio,  tertia,  sapientia.  No 
strict  distinction. 

b)  Initially  and  medially:  In,  Inluria,  cuius. 


*Verona  I  fol.  403\  404  ^  (Verona.)     saec.  vii. 

An  interesting  example  of  north  Italian  cursive. 
Very  characteristic  is  the  letter  n  which  somewhat 
resembles  our  capital  M. 


1)  A  good  example  of  Bobbio  cursive  may  be  seen  in  Milan  Ambros. 
S  45  sup.  (Bobbio)  p.  44.  to  which  Professor  Lindsay  has  kindly  called 
my  attention. 


Studia  palaeographica. 


41 


a)  %  occurs:  temperan^a.    No  ti-distinction:  nequitia.^) 

b)  Initially,  medially  (regardless  of  sound)  and  even 
finally:  Iniquitus,  Ita,  lUi;  sublecti,  erit,  nequitia;  mel, 
del,  fieri,  subiectl.^) 

*Verona  III.      (Verona.)      saec.  vrii  in. 

A  curious  minuscule  derived  from  half-uncial  and 
the  cursive  noted  in  Yerona  I  fol.  403'',  404^.  It 
has  the  same  form  of  n. 

a)  9  not  used. 

b)  Initially  in  the  word  in. 

*Verona  XXXIII.      (Verona.)      saec.  viii  in. 

An  excellent   example   of  half-uncial   passing  into 
minuscule, 
a)  ^   not  used.  b)  Not  used. 

*  Verona  XLII.      (Verona '))      saec.  viii  in. 

Half-uncial   passing  into  minuscule. 

a)  §  rarely  used,  e.  g.  at  end  of  lines:  lus^fi  cationis. 

b)  Initially  and  medially:  In,  Ille,  elus. 

*  Verona  II  fol.  P.      (Verona.)      saec.  viii.     Cursive. 

Characteristic  letters  are:  Z,  j),  r,  g  and  the  ligature  w^. 

a)  5  used  indifferently:  na^ones,  gen^bus,  polluis^s. 
No  distinction. 

b)  Initially:  In. 

*Verona  IV  fol.  6,  6^.    (Verona.)     saec.  vm.     Similar  cursive. 

a)  §  used  indifferently:  men^s,  ^bi,  uinc§,  pronun- 
§ans  etc.     No  distinction. 

b)  Initially  often:  In,  lusto,  ludaei,  lussit,  but  illas,  ignis. 


^)  The  word  otmm  is  spelled  ozium,  the  z  havinor  the  same  form 
as  in  the  word  zelus.  Assibilated  ti  must  accordingly  have  had  the 
pronunciation  of  z. 

2)  A  similar  use  of  i-longa  is  to  be  noted  in  Milan  Ambros. 
0  210  sup.  p.  46^  written  in  a  very  old  type  of  cursive.  The  peculiar 
form  of  n  found  in  the  Veronese  MS  is  also  to  be  seen  on  this  page.  The 
//-ligature  is  used  indifferently:  uenera^one,  salu^s,  men^s.  Examples 
of  i-longa  are:  lam,  sublacere,  hulus,  oratlone,  deuotlone,  coelestl. 

3)  The  MS  has  the  Veronese  ss  which  resembles  ns. 


42 


12.  Abhandlunj?:  E.  A.  I.oew 


*  Verona  XXXVII  fol.  169\     (Verona.)     saec.  viii.     Similar 
cursive. 

a)  9  used  indifferently:  ter^o,  dedica^onem,  la^tu- 
dinem,  can§co.  No  distinction.  The  ligature  occurs  for  ci: 
prouin^ae. 

b)  Initially:  In,  loacliini,  ludae. 

*Verona  XXXVIII  fol.  118.     (Verona),     saec.  viii  in. 

Transition  script.  This  well-known  page  furnishes 
one  of  the  earliest  examples  of  Veronese  minuscule 
with  the  typical  g,  r,  p  and  l. 

a)  ^  not  used. 

b)  Initially  and  medially:  In,  Ignes,  Illi,  Ita,  elus, 
prolecta. 

*Verona  LXII.      (Verona.)      saec.  viii. 

Calligraphic  minuscule  which  is  manifestly  derived 
from  the  above  mentioned  Veronese  cursive.  It  has 
the  characteristic  /,  p,  r,  g,  the  ligatures  nt,  ae,  ss 
(resembling  ns)  and  the  superior  a. 

a)  9  used  indifferently:  nup^is,  leon^o,  merits,  legi- 
§mam,  con^nen^ae.     No  distinction. 

b)  Not  used:  in,  coniugium  etc.  with  short  i. 
*Verona  LV.      (Verona.)     saec.  viii. 

a)  %  used  indifferently:  mundi^a,  ui^a,  §morem,  per- 
§naciae.     No  distinction. 

b)  Initially  often,  but  not  regularly:  In,  Ita,  Indicium, 
but  also  iustus,  iustitiae,  ignis,  iram,  ilia  etc. 

*VeroDa  LXI  fol.  1.      (Verona.)      saec.  viii. 

a)  ^  not  used. 

b)  Initially   and  medially:   In,  elus,  conlunctio,  alt. 
*Verona  CLXIII.      (Verona.)      saec.  vin. 

a)  §  occurs  occasionally.  It  is  used  indifferently :  gra^a, 
rogan^,  po^us,  adduces. 

b)  Initially  and  medially:  In,  luuat,  lacit,  cuius,  lelunas. 
*Verona  XV  marginalia.      (Verona.)      saec.  viii. 

a)  §  used  indifferently:    §bi,  facien^bus. 

b)  Initially  and  medially:  In,  lacobi,  malori. 


Studia  ptilcieot^^riiijhicci. 


43 


*Carlsruhe  Reich.  LVII.      (Verona.^))      saec.  viii. 

a)  g  used  indifferently,  more  often  for  soft  ti:  e^am, 
egyp^is,  ciuita§. 

b)  Used  irregularly:  In,  Inter,  but  ingressu,  imperium, 
cuius  with  short  i. 

*Paris  653.      (Verona?)      saec.  viii/ix.     See  plate  2. 

a)  %  used  by  one  hand  (fol.  1 — G"")  for  assibilated  ii: 
graham,  ignoran^a,  but  partis.  Distinction  made.  The 
new  hand  on  fol.  6^  knows  neither  §  nor  the  ^i-distinc- 
tion:  e^?am,  uoca^i 

b)  Used  by  the  first  scribe  (who  knows  §):  In,  Ipse, 
Ihra,  Ita  etc.     The  second  scribe   does  not  use  it. 


*Vercelli  CLXXXIII.     (Vercelli?)     saec.  viii.     See  plate  1.^) 

a)  g  used  indifferently:  ui^a,  u§,  mul^.    No  distinction. 

b)  Initially  always:  In,  Ipso,  Illi,  Ibi  etc.;  medially  regul- 
arly for  the  semi-vocal  sound:  elus,  hulus,  cuius;  also 
when  in  occurs  in  the  body  of  a  composite  word,  e.  g. 
delude.     See  discussion  on  p.  12. 

*Vercelli  CCII.      (Vercelli?)      saec.  ix  in. 

a)  9  used  indifferently:  ra^one,  mulQ.     No  distinction. 

b)  Usually  in  the  word  m,  otherwise  not  employed: 
In  but  ius,  ita,  cuius  etc. 


1)  The  MS  has  the  curious  .s-.>?  resembhng  )is  —  a  feature  to  be 
noted  in  several  Veronese  MSS. 

2)  Knowledge  of  this  palaeographically  most  interesting  MS  I  owe 
to  the  kindness  of  Father  Ehrle,  Prefect  of  the  Vatican  library.  Through 
the  great  courtesy  of  Mgr.  M.  Vatasso  T  have  the  privilege  of  repro- 
ducing the  MS.  Several  full-page  facsimiles  of  this  MS  as  well  as  of 
others  from  the  chapter  library  of  Vercelli  will  be  given  by  Mgr.  Vatasso 
in  a  forthcoming  work.  We  have  no  positive  evidence  that  this  and 
the  following  two  MSS  were  actually  written  in  VerceUi.  Since  they 
are  manifestly  of  north  Italian  origin,  the  probability  is  that  they  were. 
I  mention  in  passing  that  the  marginalia  of  VerceUi  CLVIII  are  in  a 
hand  which  is  not  Italian.  I  take  it  for  Visigothic.  The  rules  for 
i-longa  are,  as  may  be  expected,  carefully  observed.' 


44 


12,  Abhandlunff:  E.  A.  Loew 


*Vercelli  CXLVIII.      (Vercelli?)      saec.  ix. 

a)  §  regularly  reserved  for  assibilated  ti]  and  ordinary  ti 
for  unassibilated.     Distinction  made. 

b)  Initially  often:    In,   lam,    but    ilium,    ihm;    medially 
not  used. 

*Novara  84.      (North  Italy).      saec.  viii/ix. 

a)  9    used    indifferently:    peniten^a,    na^uita^s.      No 
distinction. 

b)  Usual   with  m,    otherwise  rarely  used:   In,  but  iam, 
ita,  huius. 

Milan  Trivulziana  688.      (Novara.)     saec.  viii/ix. 

a)  %    used    indifferently:    li^gia;    ordinary   ti    for    soft 
sound:  cautioni;  ci  for  soft  ti:  admonicionem. 

b)  Initially    frequent   thoucjh    not   always:    In,   ludiciis, 
luret,  but  index. 

*Paris  Baluze  270.     (North  Italy.)     saec.  viii/ix. 

a)  §   used  indifferently:   ra^o,  mul^s. 

b)  Rarely  used:  In  but  also  in  with  short  i. 

Breslau  Rhedig.  R  169  f.  92^.     (Aquileia?)     saec.  viii  ex. 

a)  §  used   before    consonants:    ^berii.     ci    is  used   for 

assibilated  ti:   tercie,  nupcie. 

b)  Initially  the  rule:  Ilium,  circumlbat,  Ihs  etc. 

Modena  0  I  N  11.     saec.  viii/ix. 

a)  %  used  indifferently.     No  distinction. 

b)  Initially:  In,  ludaica. 

*Lucca  490.     saec.  viii/ix. 

a)  %  used  indifferently:  lus^^am,  rait^tur,    §meas  etc. 
No  distinction. 

b)  Not  used. 


*Roine  Sessor.  55  (2099)  ff.  89  to  end.      saec.  viii  ex. 

a)  §  used    indifferently:    enun^are,   is§s,   dis^inc^one. 
No  distinction. 

b)  Not  used  as  a  rule:  in,  indicaret,  coniungas. 


Studia  palaeographica. 


45 


*Rome  Sessor.  94  (1524)  part  I  =  pp.  1 — 32.     saec.  viii/ix. 

a)  5  used  indifferently,  but  preferably  for  soft  ti:  ui^a, 
faculta^bus.     No  strict  distinction:    pretiosus,  fortia. 

b)  Initially  and  medially:  lam  (corrector  changed  to 
iam),  leluniis,  cuius  etc. 

*Rome  Sessor.  66  (2098).     saec.  ix. 

a)  §  where  used  has  soft  sound,  but  no  strict  distinction 
is  observed  between  assibilated  and  unassibilated  ti:  in- 
nocent am,  but  definitione. 

b)  Initially  the  rule;   medially  rarely. 
*Rome  Sessor.  40  (1258).     saec.  ix. 

a)  §  used  for  assibilated  ti.  Distinction  observed: 
scien^a,  adtingeret. 

b)  Initially  and  medially:  In,  Ire,  but  illius;  hujus, 
elus  etc. 

*Rome  Sessor.  41   (1479).     saec.  ix. 

a)  §  for  assibilated  ti.     Distinction  observed. 

b)  Initially,  the  rule;  but  ipse,  illi;  medially  not  al- 
ways: huIus  and  huius,   maior. 

*Rome  Sessor.  96  (1565).      saec.  ix. 

a)  §  for  assibilated  ^i.  Distinction  made:  prophe§ am,  ^ibi. 

b)  Not  regularly  used:  In,  but  also  in,  huius,  adiunxit  etc. 
*Rome  Sessor.  63  (2102).     saec.  ix. 

a)  ^  for  assibilated  ti.  Distinction  usually  observed: 
po§us,  tanti. 

b)  As  a  rule  not  used. 

In  the  more  recent  MSS  of  this  school  —  for  the 
above  named  Sessoriani  are  supposedly  all  from  Nonantola 
—  §  and  the  ^i-distinction  and  i-longa  are  all  given  up^). 
The  same  is  true  of  the  MSS  of  Vercelli,  Novara,  Bobbio, 
Verona,  Lucca  and  other  Italian  centres.  These  elements  dis- 
appear as  soon  as  the  Caroline  minuscule  prevails. 


')  Is  it  possible  that  we  have  a  revival  of  the  practice  in  the  MS 
*Bologna  Univ.  1604  (Nonantola)  saec.  Xl/XII,  or  is  it  a  case  of  copying? 
I  noted  ra/tonis  (with  i  drawn  down)  but  utique  (with  short  i). 


46 


12.  Abhandlung:  E.  A.  Loew 


Hot  nan  SchooL 

No  very  ancient  minuscule  MSS  are  known.  Those  that 
are  posterior  to  the  9^*^  century  lack  the  ligature  §  and  ob- 
serve no  fi-distinction.    The  i-longa  is  not  seldom  used  initially. 


The  Beneventan  or  South  Italian  School ^) 

a)  I.  In  oldest  minuscule  MSS  (saec.  viii)  §  is  used  indiffer- 
ently, e.  g.  Monte  Cassino  753:  ui^is  and  mit^tur.  Bam- 
berg H  J  IV  15:  no§§iam. 

II.  In  Paris  7530  saec.  viii  ex.  §  is  regularly  reserved  for 
assibilated  ti,  and  the  distinction  is  strictly  observed.  Although 
in  some  MSS  of  the  9^''  century  insecurity  is  still  to  be  noted 
(e.  g.  Vatic.  3320,  where  a  later  corrector  often  changed  tio 
to  ^o,  and  Naples  VI  B  12)  the  majority  of  the  MSS  show 
perfect  knowledge  of  the  two  uses  of  ti.  From  the  9^^*  to 
the  14^^  century  the  form  ^  is  regularly  used  for  assibilated, 
and  the  normal  form  for  unassibilated  ti.  This  is  one  of  the 
main  rules  of  the  Beneventan  script.  A  scribe  rarely  wrote  ord- 
inary ti  for  ^.  I  have  noted  but  few  cases,  e.  g.  Rome  Valli- 
cell.  D.  5,  saec.  XI  in.:  unguentiam;  Vatic,  lat.  595:  petiit, 
changed  by  corrector  to  pe^it,  and  some  cases  in  Floren. 
Laur.  68,  2.  ^)  Occassionally  too,  we  find  ci  for  ti.  This  occurs 
so  seldom  that  it  is  without  doubt  the  result  of  slavish  copying 
from  an  original  in  which  vi  stood  for  assibilated  ti  —  and 
such  spelling  was  certainly  not  unusual  in  the  schools  north 
of  the  Beneventan  zone.  Examples  are:  Monte  Cassino  5: 
precio  corrected  to  pre^o;  Monte  Cassino  295:  uicia  corrected 
to  ui§a;  Vatic,  lat.  3973:  ueneciis,  and  Vatic.  Borgian.  339: 
cicius.      On    the    other    hand,    there    is   nothing    surprising  if 


*)  The  following  summary  is  based  upon  an  examination  of  over 
three  hundred  Beneventan  MSS. 

^)  Cf.  Andresen,  In  Taciti  Historias  studia  critica  et  palaeographica 
I  (1899),  p.  8. 


Studia  palaeographica. 


47 


we  find  the  ligature  §  for  ci.  I  noted  perni^e  in  Monte 
Cassino  187,  saec.  ix.  An  11*^^  century  corrector  wrote  ci  for 
the  ligature. 

b)  For  the  usage  of  i-longa  in  Beneventan  MSS  see 
p.  9-10. 

Visigothic  Minuscule. 

a)  The  frequent  occurrence  of  §  is  noticeable  only  in  the 
oldest  MSS,  e.  g.  Verona  LXXXIX  (where  it  is  used  indiffer- 
ently) and  Autun  27  +  Paris  Nouv.  Acq.  1628 — 9  (where  there 
is  a  tendency  to  reserve  the  ligature  for  the  assibilated  sound). 
In  MSS  of  the  9^^  or  10^^  century  §  is  found  here  and  there 
at  the  end  of  a  line  to  save  space.  It  does  not  form  part  of 
the  calligraphic  hand.  The  distinction  between  assibilated  and 
unassibilated  ti  was  in  time  graphically  represented.  As  this 
question  is  of  importance  in  dating  Visigothic  MSS,  it  has  been 
treated  separately   and  at  greater  length  below.    See  part  IV. 

b)  For  the  usage  of  i-longa  in  Visigothic  MSS  see  above 
p.  8  —  9.     The  MS  evidence  is  given  in  part  IV. 


German  Schools. 


Early  Minuscule  MSS  from  German  centres  have  as  a  rule 
neither  ^  nor  the  ^i-distinction,  nor  the  i-longa  —  owing 
most  likely  to  Caroline  influence.  Nevertheless  in  several  MSS 
of  the  transition  period^  is  found,  along  with  other  cursive 
features  such  as  ri  and  te.  Its  presence,  therefore,  may  safely 
be  taken  as  a  hint  of  the  date  of  the  MS. 

I  noted  §   sparingly  used  in  the  following  MSS. 

*Munich  4547.^)      (Kysila-group.)      saec.  viii/ix. 

a)  used  for  hard  sound:  ^meret  (f.  11),  uerita^s  (f.  12), 
inmaculag  (f.  12),    ^bi  (f.  22)  etc. 

b)  i-longa  is  not  used. 


^)  Dr.  Wilhelm  of  the  University  of  Munich  places  the  Kysila-group 
of  MSS  in  the  region  of  Utrecht.  This  judgment  is  based  upon  litur- 
gical and  philological  evidence  furnished  by  the  MSS  themselves. 


48 


12.  Abhandlung;  E.  A.  Loew 


*Munich  4549.     (Same  group.)     saec.  viii/ix. 

a)  %  used  indifferently:  ui^is,  impagen^ae,  men^, 
cura^s,  la§tat  etc. 

b)  Initially  here  and  there;  not  medially. 
*Munich  4542.      (Same  group.)      saec.  viii/ix. 

a)  §  occurs  for  the  assibilated  sound,  but  chiefly  the 
ordinary  U:  sapien^am  (f.  139^)  corrup^onem  (f.  132') 
but  next  line:  corruptione,  with  ordinary  tl. 

b)  Initially  in  the  word  in;  not  medially. 
*Munich  14421.     saec.  viu/ix. 

a)  9  like  the  ligature  te  is  found  chiefly  at  the  end 
of  the  line,  and  is  used  indifferently:  stul§  (f.  9^'),  dix- 
eri^s  (f.  12^),  uerita^s  (f.  15^),  laeti^a  (f.  24),  captiui- 
ta§s  (f.  43  in  middle  of  line)  etc. 

b)  Not  used. 

*Munich  4564.     saec.  ix.     Hand  A    is   calligraphic,   B  more 
cursive. 

a)  Not  used  by  hand  A.  Hand  B  used  §  indifferently: 
cotgdiae,  ora^one  (f.  220),  benedici^s,  facials  (f.  220^), 
turba^onem  (f.  221^). 

b)  Not  used. 
*Munich  6277.      saec.  ix. 

a)  §  used  indifferently:  opera^o,  per^mescat,  in^mo 
(f.  50),  iusti^e,  ni^tur,  desperationem  with  ordinary  ti 
(f.  50')  etc. 

b)  Not  used. 
*Munich  6402.      saec.  ix. 

a)  Where  found  %  usually  has  the  assibilated  sound: 
por^o  (f.45),  gra^a  (f.  51^),  e^am,  genera^o  (f.  52)  etc. 
But  talen^  (f.  53^).  Ordinary  ti  is  chiefly  used  for  either 
sound,  yet  ci  occurs  for  ti:  praecio,  praeciosi  (f.  61). 

b)  Here  and  there  it  crops  up,  but  manifestly  due  to 
the  exemplar:  malor  and  maior  (f.  53"^). 

*Munich  4719^.      saec.  ix. 

a)  %  used  indifferently:  contesta^o,  perseuera^,  opta^o, 

obstina^s. 

b)  Not  used. 


Studia  Palaeographica. 


49 


In  MSS  of  the  St.  Gall,  Reichenau  and  Chur  districts  no 
^^'-distinction  is  observed.  In  many  of  them,  however,  ci  takes 
the  place  of  assibilated  ti  —  a  practice  already  noted  in 
numerous  French  MSS,  which  probably  served  as  models  for 
the  Swiss. ^)  The  ligature  ^  occurs  only  here  and  there,  used 
indifferently.  As  a  rule  i-longa  is  not  employed;  occasionally 
it  is  found  at  the  beginning  of  a  word,  and  less  frequently 
in  the  middle.  The  following  early  examples  have  been 
examined^):  §  St.  Gall  70,  §238^),  44,  914,  185,  §731, 
§3483),  §  722;  Berne  376  3);  §  Zurich  Cantonsbibl.  CXL^), 
§  Cantonsbibl.  (Rheinau)  30;  §  Einsiedeln  27,  §  347  3),  199^), 
§281 3)  and  157. 3) 


Insular  Schools.^) 

a)  The  form  of  the  ^i-ligature  found  in  Insular  MSS,  as 
has  been  mentioned  above,  differs  from  §  in  that  the  upper 
loop  or  curve  is  missing  (see  p.  20).  The  form  could  easily 
have  arisen  from  semi-uncial  t  combining  with  i.  The  ab- 
sence of  the  form  ^  in  pure  Insular  products  may  be  regarded 
as  one  of  the  many  proofs  of  the  peculiar  origin  —  in  which 
cursive  played  no  part  —  of  the  Insular  writing.  The  ^i-lig- 
ature,  where  found,  is  used  indifferently.  No  distinction  be- 
tween the  assibilated  and  unassibilated  sounds  is  made. 

b)  It  is  fair  to  say  that  i-longa  —  which  as  has  been 
shown   is  of  cursive  origin  —    is  foreign   to  Insular  MSS.     It 


^)  Historical  and  graphic  considerations  suggest  Burgundian  in- 
fluence. Further  investigation  may  disclose  relations  between  Luxeuil 
and  Chur  or  some  other  Swiss  centre.  I  suspect  that  the  MSS  Berne  611 
and  St.  Gall  214  are  Swiss  products  formed  under  the  influence  of  Luxeuil. 

2)  MSS  preceded  by  §  have  ci  for  soft  ti. 

3)  In  this  MS  ^  used  indiff'erently  is  occasionally  found,  especially 
at  the  end  of  a  line. 

*)  Cf.  facs.  in  Lindsay,   Early  Irish  Minuscule  Script,   Oxford  1910. 
Sitzgsb.  d.  philos.-pbilol.  u.  d.  hist.  K1.  Jahrg.  1910,  12.  Abh.  4 


50 


12.  Abhandlung:  E.  A.  Loew 


is  often  found  initially,  but  not  with  any  apparent  regularity. 
Medially  it  is  used  but  rarely.^) 

I  o-ive   a  few  examples.    For  the  ^i-ligature  I  use  italics. 


*Bodl.  Douce  140  f.   100\     a)  can^icum,  b)  not  used. 
The  Book  of  Dimma.     a)  fueri/is,  b)  used  initially,  often. 
The  Book  of  Mulling,     a)  uultis,   b)  used  initially,  often. 
*Vatic.  Pal.  lat.  68.    a)  adnun^iauit,  deniergen/is,  b)  used  in  in. 
*  Vatic,  lat.  491.     a)  grafias,  pieta^is,  b)  not  used. 
*London  Cotton  Tib.  C  II.     a)  potesta/?',  b)  used  with  in. 
*Paris  10  837.     a)  fimoreni,  agapi/i. 
*Vatic.  Pal.  lat.  235.     a)  Hhi,  fon^ibus,    b)  not  used. 
*Vienna  16.      a)    repeti^ione,    ^ibi,      b)  In  long.      Insular  in- 
fluenced by  Italian  cursive. 
Turin  F  IV  1  fasc.  6.    a)  indigna^ionein,  tihl,  mortis,    b)  In  long. 


We   have    seen,    then,    that    the    ^i-ligature    originated   in 
Italian  cursive  of  the  early  middle  ages.    We  have  found  it  in 
all  those  types  of  pre-Caroline  minuscule  which  obviously  base 
upon  cursive,  and  the  usage  in  the  MSS  corresponded  to  that 
of   the    documents.      We    missed   it,    on    the   other   hand,    in 
most  of  the  MSS  from  about  the  beginning  of  the  9^^  century. 
This  circumstance   can  be   attributed  to  but  one  cause  —  the 
Carohne    script-reform.      The    hypothesis   is   confirmed    by   the 
consideration    that  many  MSS  of  about  the  year  800,   written 
in  north  Italy,  France  and  Germany  show  traces  of  the  aban- 
doned   practice.     They   are  the  MSS   of  the    transition  period. 
Still  more    cogent   evidence    is  furnished    by    the  fact    that   in 
the   Beneventan  centres    where    the  Caroline  influence    did  not 
reach,  the  ^i-ligature  continued  in  use  along  with  several  other 

^)  I  have  found  i-lonj^a  medially  in  *Palat.  202  delnde;  *Bodl.  Laud, 
lat.  108  lelunandura.  I  believe  that  in  all  such  cases  foreign  influence 
is  responsible  for  the  i-longa. 


Studia  palaeographica. 


51 


cursive  features  which  elsewhere  were  abolished.  Doubtless 
for  similar  reasons  ^  is  found  in  many  Visigothic  MSS,  though 
relegated,  to  be  sure,  to  a  place  of  insignificance.  The  history 
of  §,  then,  is  a  kind  of  epitome  of  the  development  of  Latin 
minuscule  in  its  first  important  stage.  We  have  seen,  also, 
that  the  spelling  ci  for  soft  ti  is  a  characteristic  of  early 
French,  not  of  early  Italian  and  that  the  graphic  distinction 
of  assibilated  and  unassibilated  ti  was  regularly  practiced  in 
but  two  schools,  the  Beneventan  and  the  Visigothic;  although 
the  usefulness  of  distinguishing  in  script  the  two  sounds  of  ti 
was  elsewhere  recognized  —  as  several  instances  clearly  show 
—  before  the  practice  became  a  law  of  the  Spanish  and  south 
Italian  minuscule. 

From  all  this  the  palaeographer  may  draw  a  practical 
hint  or  two  for  dating  and  placing  MSS.  For  example,  the 
regular  use  of  %  in  a  French  MS  is  a  fair  sign  that  the  MS 
was  written  some  time  before  the  middle  of  the  8*^  century.^) 
Its  sporadic  appearance,  on  the  other  hand,  suggests  that  the 
MS  belongs  in  the  period  of  transition,  i.  e.  about  the  year  800. 
The  frequent  use  of  ci  for  soft  ti  in  a  pre-Caroline  MS  points 
to  French  origin  rather  than  to  Italian  or  Spanish.^)  And 
certain  corruptions  in  the  text  due  to  the  ligature  ^  permit 
a  surmise  as  to  the  probable  nature   of  the  archetype.^) 


M  The  same  is  true  for  Visigothic  MSS. 

-)  See  p.  20,  note  1.  An  editor  collating  a  Visigothic  MS  must 
be  on  his  guard  against  mistaking  for  c  a  certain  form  of  t  w^hich 
occurs  in  ligatures.  Even  Maffei  misread  ci  where  the  MS  has  ti. 
Cf.  Spagnolo,  L'Orazionale  Gotico-Mozarabico  etc.  estratto  dalla  Rivista 
Bibliofirafica  Italiana  (10—25.  Aug.  1899}  p.  8,  line  11.  For  precmm 
read  pre^mm. 

^)  1  refer  to  cases  where  the  text  has  g  for  ti,  an  error  due  most 
likely  to  copying,  from  an  original  which  had  ^,  by  a  scribe  unaccus- 
tomed to  the  ligature.  An  instructive  example  is  cited  by  Traube,  Text- 
geschichte  der  Regula  S.  Benedict!,  p.  85. 


52 


12.  Abhandlung:  E.  A.  Loew 


IV, 

Ti  in  Spanish  MSS. 

In  Yisigothic   calligraphy   the  manner   of  writing  ti  is  of 
signal  interest  and  importance.    After  a  certain  time  the  Spanish 
scHbe,  just  as  the  Beneventan,  used  two  distinct  forms  for  as- 
sibilated  and  unassibilated  tL    From  evidence  given  below  it  will 
be  seen  that  it  is  possible  to  fix  with  some  degree  of  precision 
the  period    when    the   custom   of  making    the   distinction    was 
introduced  into  Visigothic  book- writing.    In  other  words,  a  cri- 
terion for  dating  can  be   won.     The  assibilated  and  unassibil- 
ated forms  differ  but  slightly.^)    In  the  case  of  unassibilated  ti 
the  normal  forms  of  t  and  i  are  retained.    In  the  case  of  as- 
sibilated  ti  the  i  is  prolonged  below  the  line  and  often  turned 
in  instead  of  out  (cf.  plates  5,  6  and  7),   the  whole  difference 
lying   in  the  form    of  the  i,    the  letter  t  suffering  no  change. 
The  Spanish  form  for  assibilated  ti  (o))  corresponds,  then,  to 
the  Beneventan   for  unassibilated.     But   the  form  §,  which  is 


1)  This  perhaps  explains  how  it  happened  to  escape  the  attention 
of  palaeographers.    Steffens  has  noted  the  (^-distinction  in  his  description 
of  Escor.  T  II  24  (formerly  Q  II  24).     That  he  too  failed  to  realize  that 
it  was   as  much  a  scribal  rule  in  Visigothic   as  in  Beneventan   is   seen 
from   the  fact   that   in  his   introduction   he  speaks   of  the   ^-distinction 
in  Beneventan  M6S  but  not  in  Visigothic.    I  believe  that  Delisle's  report 
of  my  observations   on   the   subject   (Comptes-rendus   de  FAcademie   des 
inscriptions,  1909,   pp.  775 -778  and   Bibliotheque  de  Tecole  des  chartes 
LXXI  (1910)  233-235)   is  its   first  formulation   in  palaeographical  liter- 
ature,   for  there   is  no  mention   of  it   in   Munoz  y  Rivero,    Ewald  and 
Loewe,  Wattenbach,  or  in  the  earlier  writers  on  Spanish  palaeography. 
It  is  a  curious  fact  that    even  Paoli  with  whom  the  question  of  assibil- 
ated ti  was  a  matter  of  keen  interest  made  no  reference  to  the  distinc- 
tion  in  his   description    of  the  Visigothic   MS    Floren.   Laur.  Ashb.  17- 
Cf.  CoUezione  Fiorentina,  pi.  33. 


Studia  palaeographica. 


53 


regularly  reserved  for  assibilated  ti  in  Beneventan  calligraphy, 
was  not  unknown  in  Spanish  MSS.  However,  whereas  in  Ben- 
eventan it  was  a  constant  feature  of  the  book-hand,  in  Spanish 
it  was  in  time  avoided.  For,  excepting  the  oldest  known 
Visigothic  MSS  (Verona  LXXXIX  and  Autun  27  +  Paris  Nouv. 
Acq.  1628 — 9)  which  employ  ^  frequently,  we  find  it  chiefly 
at  the  end  of  a  line,  where  economy  of  space  demanded  the 
shorter  form,  or  in  additions  entered  in  cursive  where  %  is 
usually  confined  —  as  is  the  case  in  Italian  cursive  —  to  re- 
presenting the  assibilated  sound. 

It  is  needless  to  say  that  the  custom  of  graphically  dis- 
tinguishing the  two  kinds  of  ti  in  the  Visigothic  book-hand, 
which  dates,  as  will  be  seen,  from  about  the  end  of  the 
9"'  century,  is  in  no  wise  a  reflection  of  a  change  of  pronun- 
ciation then  taking  place  in  Spain.  The  rule  given  by  Isidore, 
bishop  of  Seville,  for  the  orthography  .of  such  words  as  iiistitia^ 
militia  etc.  —  to  the  effect  that  they  should  not  be  written 
with  a  ^  as  they  were  pronounced  but  with  a  t  as  was  Latin 
usage  —  shows  that  three  centuries  prior  to  the  introduction 
into  calligraphy  of  the  graphic  distinction  between  assibilated 
and  unassibilated  ti,  the  difference  in  their  pronunciation  w^as 
already  an  accomplished  fact.^)  And  we  know  from  inscriptions 
that  the  assibilation  of  ti  must  have  taken  place  at  quite  an 
early  date.^)  That  the  graphic  distinction  should  have  fol- 
lowed centuries  after  the  phonetic  change  may  be  natural 
enough  —  we  encounter  the  same  phenomenon  in  Italy  — 
but  it  is  important  to  observe  that  the  distinction  was  prac- 
ticed in  cursive  writing  long  before  it  was  employed  in  calli- 
graphic products,  and  that  the  manner  of  representing  the 
distinction  in  Spanish  cursive  (§  for  soft  ti)  was  the  same  as 
that  employed  in  Italian  cursive  and  in  Beneventan  book-hand 
—  facts  which    seem    to  speak    for   the  Italian    origin    of  the 


1)  Isidor.  Etymol.  I,  XXVlI,  28.     See   above,  p.  17,   note  7,    where 
the  passage  is  quoted. 

2)  On  the  assibilation  of  ti  in  the  Latin-speaking  countries  see  the 
works  cited  above,   p.  16,  note  2. 


54 


12.  Abhandlung:  E.  A.  Loew 


Studia  palaeographica. 


55 


custom.  This  supposition  becomes  more  convincinor  when  we 
remember  that  the  Spanish  scribe  invented  a  new  form  for 
denoting  assibilated  ti,  and  that  this  form  is  found  in  Visi- 
gothic  MSS  a  good  century  after  the  Beneventan  scribe  was 
making  the  distinction.  That  the  practice  of  making  the 
^i-distinction  in  Visigothic  MSS  dates  from  about  the  year  900 
is  established  beyond  a  reasonable  doubt  by  the  evidence  of 
over  one  hundred  MSS  listed  below. 

A  word  as  to  the  nature  of  the  evidence.    It  is  furnished 
by  two  sources:    the  MSS  themselves,    and  facsimiles   of  MSS. 
As  for  facsimiles,    in   the  case    of  some  MSS  I  was   dependent 
upon  one  only;  in  other  cases,  however,  photographs  of  several 
pages  or  even  of  the  entire  MS  were  at  my  disposition.    More 
MSS  might  easily  have  been  added  without  modifying  results,  0 
but  I  pr'eferred  to  use  only  those  dated  by  recognized  author- 
ities, thus  avoiding  as  far  as  possible  basing  an  argument  upon 
dates  for  which   I  alone  was  responsible.     I  also  hesitated  to 
use  facsimiles  when  it  was  not  clear  whence  they  were  taken, 
as  in  older  books  on  Spanish  palaeography.     Notes   furnished 
me  by  others  were  used  only  when  supplemented  by  facsimiles. 
1  am    aware   that  the  evidence   supplied    by  facsimiles  of 
one  or  two  pages  of  a  MS  is  not  necessarily  conclusive,  as  it 
may  represent  (as  it  sometimes  does)  the  usage  of  one  scribe 
and  not  of  another.    But  whereas  this  evidence  taken   by  itself 
might  seem  of  questionable  worth,  its  weight  as  supplementary 
evidence  when  used  in  connection  with  facts  gathered  from  the 
MSS  themselves  will  not  be  gainsaid.    The  fact  that  the  usage 
found    in   the    facsimiles    is  not    at    all    at    variance    with    the 
usage  noted  by  me  in  the  MSS  is  a  guarantee  of  their  value. 
However,  the  brunt  of  the  argument  will  be  borne  by  the  forty- 
five  MSS  actually  examined  by  me   —   MSS  which   are   fairly 
representative  of  the   different  phases    of  Spanish   calligraphy. 
In    the    following   list   the  MSS    are    arranged   approxim- 

1)  I  have  examined  photographs  of  at  least  fifty  MSS  not  included 
in  my  list.  In  these  MSS  the  ti-usage  agreed  with  that  of  the  MSS 
whose  evidence  is  given  below. 


ately  in  chronological   order.    In  most  cases    my  date  is  iden- 
tical   with    that    of  others.     In    the   few  instances    where  the 
difference    of  opinion   is  essential  the  reasons  for  my  date  are 
^riveii    after    the  list.^)     I  give    first  the  usage  of  ti,    with  ex- 
amples taken   from   the  MS  or  from  a  facsimile.     The  itali- 
cized ft   represents  the  ordinary  form   of  t  and  L     For 
th3  ligature   §    and   the  assibilated  form  of  ti  I  have  tried  to 
reproduce  the  typical  form  found  in  the  MS.    After  ti  I  give  the 
i-longa  usage.    I  also  noted  the  use  of  the  forked  i-longa  (shaped 
like  a  tall  y).     The  form   of  the  shafts  of  tall  letters  is  given 
because  of  its  value  as  a  criterion  for  dating.    Lastly,  it  seemed 
helpful  to  give  some  literature,  for  the  sake  of  quick  orientation. 
I  gave  that  which  I  had  at  hand,  without  going  out  of  my  way 
to  make  researches  extraneous  to  the   purposes  of  this  study. 
The  references  frequently  cited  appear  under  the  following 
abbreviated  forms: 


Beer.     Handschriftenschiltze  Spaniens,  Vienna  1894. 
Beer-Diaz  Jimenez.     Noticias  bibliograficas  y  catalogo  de  los 
codices  de  la  santa  Iglesia  Catedral  de  Leon,  Leon   1888. 
Bibl.  P.  L.  H.     Hartel-Loewe,   Bibliotheca  Patrum  Latinorum 

Hispaniensis,  Vienna  1887. 
Cat.  Add.     A  Catalogue  of  the  Additions  to  the  MSS  of  the 

British  Museum. 
Delisle-Melanges.     Melanges  de   paleographie  et  de  biblio- 
graphic, Paris  1880. 
Eguren.     Memoria  descriptiva  de  los  codices  notables  conser- 
vados  en  los  Archivos  ecclesiasticos  de  Espafia,  Madrid  1859. 
Exempla.     Ewald  et  Loewe,  Exempla  Scripturae  Visigoticae, 

Heidelberg  1883. 
Merino.     Escuela  Paleografica,   Madrid  1780. 
Munoz.     Munoz  y  Rivero,  Paleografia  Visigoda,  Madrid  1881. 

I)  See  p.  81  sqq. 


56 


12.  Abhandlung:  E.  A.  Loew 


N.  A.  Neues  Archiv  der  Gesellschaft  flir  iiltere  deutsche  Ge- 
schichtskunde  VI  (1880)  p.  219-398  =  P.  Ewald,  Keise 
nach  Spanien  im  Winter  1878  —  79. 

*)  MSS  actually  examined  are  starred. 


1.  *Verona  Capitol.  LXXXIX.     saec.  viii  in.^)  ut  vid. 

a)  No  ti-distinction:  pa/ienfie,  unique,  Hh\.  Noteworthy 
is  the  relatively  frequent  occurrence  of  §.  It  is  found 
passim  on  every  page  and  is  used  indifferently:  nequi^e 
(begin,  of  line),  frucgficet  (middle  of  L),  men ^bus  (middle 
of  1.),  conscien^ia  (middle  of  1.).  These  four  examples 
are  taken  from  one  page.  In  contemporary  marginalia: 
ius^^am  etc.  Later  MSS  use  §  only  occasionally  at  the 
end  of  lines. 

b)  Rule  observed. 2) 

Cf.  Maffei,  Opusc.  Eccles.,  p.  80,  pi.  IV,  no.  18 
(whence  Nouveau  Traite  III,  449,  pi.  60);  idem,  Istoria 
Teologica  (Trento  1742)  pi.  IV,  part  XVII  and  XXI; 
a  poor  facsimile  also  on  p.  CXXXI  of  Thomasii  Opera 
omnia  studio  et  cura  Josephi  Blanchini,  Tom.  I  (Rome 
1741);  Spagnolo,  L'orazionale  gotico-mozarabico  etc., 


1)  On  f.  3^  (lower  right  hand  corner)  there  is  a  rather  obscure 
entry  of  a  personal  character  ending  with  the  words:  in  XX  anno  liut- 
prandi  regis,  i.  e.  the  year  732.  As  the  upper  half  of  the  page  has 
the  same  kind  of  writing  as  the  body  of  the  MS,  the  above  entry  — 
if  indeed  we  may  regard  it  as  chronicling  an  actual  fact  which  then 
took  place  —  gives  us  the  terminus  post  quern  non,  and  the  mention 
of  Luitprand  would  connect  the  MS  with  north  Italy.  It  must  be  con- 
fessed that  the  first  impression  is  that  the  MS  belongs  in  the  9^^  century, 
—  it  is  carefully  and  regularly  written  —  but  being  a  liturgical  book, 
special  pains  may  have  been  taken  with  it,  which  would  account  for 
the  impression.  Furthermore  the  rather  frequent  occurence  of  certain 
ligatures,  especially  of  §,  also  favors  the  earlier  date.  I  prefer  to  leave 
the  question  of  the  date  undecided.  The  matter  deserves  further  in- 
vestigation. 

2)  For   the  rules   of  i-longa   in  Visigothic  MSS  see  above,  p.  8—9. 


Studia  palaeographica. 


57 


estratto   dalla  Rivista  Bibliografica  Italians  (10—25 
Aug.  1899);  Ferotin,  Liber  Ordinum,  p.  XV,  note  2. 

2.  *Paris  Nouv.  Acq.  Lat.  1628  (ff.  17-18).    saec.  viii  ut  vid. 

a)  No  ti-distinction.     In    the  more    cursive    portions  § 
is  used  indifferently:  ter^a,  eviden^ssime. 

b)  Rule  observed.     Occasionally  even  Ilia. 

Cf.  Delisle,  Les  vols  de  Libri  au  seminaire  d'Autun 
(Bibliotheque  de  I'ecole  des  chartes  LIX  (1898) 
386-392.1) 

3.  Escor.  R  II 18.     ante  a.  779. 

a)  No  fi-distinction  in  minuscule  portion:  resurrec^/one, 
ter^io.  In  cursive  parts  the  distinction  is  usually  made, 
§  or  similar  forms  representing  the  soft  sound:  Ius/«*§am, 
e^am.     Yet  exceptions  occur:  segon^ia. 

b)  i-longa  rule  observed  in  cursive  and  minuscule:  In,  Ipsa, 
Ibi,  cuius;  but  ilia.    Also  i-longa  with  forked  top:  acala. 

Cf.  Exempla,  pi.  IV— VII,  whence  Arndt-Tangl, 
Schrifttaf.*,  pi.  8b;  N.  A.  VI,  275;  Bibl.  P.  L.  H., 
p.  130;  Steffens,  Lat.  Pal.^,  pi.  35. 

4.  Madrid  Tolet.  2.  1.     saec.  vni  ex.  ut  vid. 

Now  kept  in  Vitrina  4'',  Sala  I^. 

a)  No  f^-distinction:  pafienter,  terfia  and  sep^ima. 

b)  Rule  observed:  Isti,  malor,  caIn,  elus,  even  Illi;  caIn 
with  forked  i-longa. 

Cf.  Exempla,  pi.  IX:  Bibl.  P.  L.  H.,  p.  261;  Mufioz, 
pi.  VIII— IX.  The  date  there  given  (10*^'  cent.,  p.  119) 
is  impossible.  The  date  a.  708  given  by  Merino 
(p.  55)  is  likewise  untenable.  On  the  inscription  at 
the  end  of  the  MS,  which  has  been  the  cause  of 
erroneous  dating,  see  Berger,  Hist,  de  la  Vulg.,  p.  13. 

^)  These  leaves  as  well  as  ff.  21—22  of  Paris  Nouv.  Acq.  1629  formed 
part  of  Autun  27  which  unfortunately  I  have  seen  only  in  facsimiles. 
Professor  Lindsay  kindly  informs  me  that  the  distinction  is  usually  made 
in  ihe  minuscule  part  of  the  MS,  but  not  as  in  later  Visigothic  MSS, 
the  assibilation  being  represented  by  §  or  some  similar  form.  But  cases 
of  ^  for  the  hard  sound  as  well  as  of  ordinary  ti  for  the  soft  sound 
also  occur.  It  is  very  important  to  note  that  no  distinction  is  made 
in  the  cursive  portions. 


58 


12.  Abhaudlung:  E.  A.  Loew 


5.  Madrid  Tolet.  15.  8.     saec.  viii  ex.  ut  vid. 
Now  kept  in  Vitrina  4^  Sala  1*. 

a)  No  fi-distinction:  ter/ia,  gra/issima.  In  the  later  ad- 
ditions in  cursive  the  distinction  is  made  as  in  Escor.  U  II  18. 
The  use  of  §  in  the  word  den^bus  (Exempla,  pi.  XII) 
recalls  older  cursive  where  no  distinction  is  made  and  ^ 
is  used  indifferently. 

b)  Rule  observed,    even  lUic,   Ille,   but  ilia  also  occurs. 

Cf.  Exemi)la  pi.  X— XII,  whence  Arndt-Tangl, 
op.  cit.  pi.  8  c;  Bibl.  P.  L.  H.,  p.  291,  "saec.  viii/ir'; 
Beer,  Codices  Graeci  et  Latini  photographice  de- 
picti,  Tom.  XIII  (Sijthoff,  Leyden  1909),  Praefatio 
p.  XXI\',  whence  Ihm,  Pal.  Lat.,  pi.  VII. 
().  Leon  Eccl.  Cathedr.  15.     saec.  ix.     (Clark's  photos.) 

a)  No  fi-distinction:  erudi^ionis.  an^iociam. 

b)  Regular,  even  lUis  and  Illi. 

Cf.  Beer-Diaz  Jimenez,  p.  16  sq.,  who  date  the 
upper  script  in  the  10^^  century:  "medio  vel  de- 
clinante  IX.  saec.'\  p.  XVI  of  Prooemium  to  Legis 
Romanae  Wisigothorum  fragmenta  ex  codice  palimp- 
sest© sanctae  Legionensis  ecclesiae  protulit,  illustravit 
ac  sumptu  publico  edidit  regia  historiae  Academia 
Hispana,  Matriti  (1896);  Theodosiani  libri  XVI,  edd. 
Mommsen  et  Meyer  I,  1.   p.  lxx. 

7.  *London  Egerton  1934.      saec.  ix  in.  ut  vid. 

a)  No  ^i-distinction:   cifius,  diui/iis  and  anfiquissima. 

b)  Rule  observed:   Idem,  Iberiam,  hulus,  even  lUe. 

Cf.  Cat.  Add.  (1854-1875)  p.  916;  Facs.  in  Cat. 
of  Anc.  MSS  in  Brit.  Mus.  II,  pi.  36. 

8.  *Moiite  Cassino  4.      saec.  ix.      See   plate  3. 

a)  No  ^i-distinction:  sapien^iam,  ^ibi.  :But  in  cursive 
marginal  notes  entered  apparently  by  a  later  hand  ^  is 
regularly  used  for  assibilated  U:  senten/iam. 

b)  Rule  observed.  Usually  lUe,  but  occasionally  ilia,  ilium. 

Cf.  Bibliotheca  Casinensis  I,  97  and  facsimile.    The 
date  (saec.  vii)  can  hardly   be  correct. 


Studia  palaeographica. 


59 


9.  *Monte  Cassino  19.      saec.  ix. 

a)  No    ^i-distinction:    ratio    and    re^inere.      But    cursive 
additions    by   a  later   hand    have  §    to   mark  assibilation. 

b)  Rule  observed,  even  Ilia,  also  alt. 

Cf.  Bibliotheca  Casinensis  I,  233  and  facsimile. 
Their  date  is  saec.  vii,    which  is  hardly  possible. 

10.  Escor.  &  I  14.     saec.  ix  ut  vid. 

a)  No  ^i-distinction :   inven^ione  and  dogmafibus. 

b)  Rule  observed :  Id,  In,  Ignem,  cuius,  delude,  even  Ibi. 

Cf.  Exempla,  pi.  XIII;  N.  A.  VI,  250;  Bibl.  P.  L.  H., 
p.  70  and  earlier  Pertz'  Archiv  VIII,  815;  Rev. 
Bened.  XXVII  (1910)  p.  2. 

11.  Madrid  Tolet.  14.  24  (now  10018).      saec.  ix  ut  vid. 

a)  No  /^-distinction:   gra/^a,  iumen/is. 

b)  Rule  observed,  even  Illis,  Illorum. 

Cf.  Exempla,  pi.  XVIII;  N.  A.  VI,  318;  Bibl.  P. 
L.  H.,  p.  290. 

12.  *Paris  Lat.  2994  (part  II).      saec.  ix  ut  vid. 

a)  No  /i-distinction :  conpara/ione  and  pecca/i. 

b)  Rule  observed,  even  Ille,  pro(h)Ibeant,  coltu. 

Cf.  Delisle,  Melanges,  p.  54  and  Facs.  de  Pecole 
des  chartes,   pi.  281. 

13.  Paris  Lat.  8093.       saec.  ix   ut  vid.      (Vollmer's  photos.) 

a)  No  /^-distinction :  sep/ies,  Ingen/ia  and  fluc/^bus. 

b)  Rule  observed,  even  Illi. 

Cf.  De  Rossi,  Inscriptiones  Christianaell,  292  (where 
Delisle  in  his  description  dates  the  MS  saec.  viii); 
Vollmer  in  M.  G.  H.  Auctt.  Ant.,  T.  XIV,  p.  xix  &  xl. 

14.  *Paris  Lat.  4667  a.  828. 

a)  No  ^i-distinction :   Induc^ione  and  u^ilitafis. 

b)  Rule  observed:  Ipsius  and  usually  Ille  but  also  illis. 

Cf.  Nouveau  Traite  III,  327  and  pi.  52;  Delisle, 
Melanges,  p.  54;  Steffens,  Lat.  Pal.^,  pi.  49;  Prou, 
Manuel  de  Paleographie^  (1910),  pi.  V,  no.  2. 


60 


12.  Ahhandlunff :  E.  A.  Loew 


Studia  palaeographica. 


61 


15.  Paris  Lat.  12254.      saec.  ix  iit  vid. 

a)  No  /i-distinction:  lec^ionis,  utilis. 

b)  Regular. 

Cf.  Delisle,  Le  cabinet  des  manuscrits  III,  229 
(where  no  mention  is  made  of  the  MS  being  Visi- 
gothic.  His  description  is:  t'critiire  du  VHP  siecle). 
For  files,  see  pi.  XVIII,  4. 

16.  Leon   Eccl    Cathedr.  22   (CVI).      post  a.  839.      (Voll- 

mer's  photos). 

a)  No  ^^-distinction:  dignaf^'onis  and  is^^s. 

b)  Rule  observed. 

Cf.  Eguren,  p.  7S  —  9;  Beer-Diaz  Jimenez,  p.  23 
'^a.  839";  N.  A.  XXVI,  397:  M.  G.  H.  Auctt.  Ant., 
T.  XIY,  p.  XXXVIII,  "saec.  x  in."  and  p.  xl. 

17.  Leon  Eccl.  Cathedr.  Fragm.  no.  8.     saec.  ix  ut  vid. 

(Yollmer's  photos.) 

a)  No  ^^-distinction :  gra^iae,  peten^i. 

b)  Regular. 

Cf.  Beer-Diaz  Jimenez,  p.  43:  "s.  x"  and  M.  G.  H. 
Auctt.  Ant.  T.  XIV,  p.  xxxviii  sq.:  "saec.  x". 
The  script   is  of  the  oldest  type. 

18.  Barcelona  Rivipullensis  46  (flv-leaves).      saec.  ix. 

a)  No  fi-distinction:  gentium,  composifio  and  uagan^^bus. 

b)  Rule  observed.     Ibi  but  ille. 

The  MS  presents  several  features  unusual  in  a 
Visigothic  MS,  e.  g.  abbreviations  of  2)rae  and  tiir 
and    the    Caroline   symbols   for  nosfri,  per  and  pro. 

Cf.  Beer,  Die  Handschriften  des  Klosters  Santa 
Maria  de  Ripoll,  I  33  and  pi.  1.  (Sitzungsberichte  d. 
Kais.  Akad.  d.  Wiss.  in  Wien.  Vol.  155  (1907),  3.  Abh. 

19.  *Berne  A  92.  3.      saec.  ix  ut  vid. 

a)  No  fi-distinction:  mali^ia  and  Ira^i,  damna^^one,  mor^i- 
ferum. 

b)  Rule  observed. 

Cf.  Steffens,  Lat.  Pal.^,  pi.  35. 


20.  Madrid  Univ.  31.      saec.  ix. 

(D.  De  Bruyne's  photos,   of  entire  MS.) 

a)  No  ^i-distinction:  letitisL^  humilia^io  and  ves^imen^is. 
At  the  end  of  a  line  the  ligature  §  is  used  for  assibil- 
ated  ti;  oran^um,  exulta^one. 

b)  Rule  observed,  even  Illius  (often)  and  alt. 

Cf.  Facs.  in  Merino,  pi.  VI;  Berger,  Hist,  de  la 
Vulg. ,  p.  22.  The  date  (saec.  x)  in  V\^attenbach, 
Anleit.  z.  lat.  Pal.*,   p.  22  is  hardly  possible. 

21.  *Siguenza  Capitol.  Decretale  150.^)      saec.  ix  ut  vid. 

a)  No  ^i-distinction:  lustifisL.  But  at  end  of  line,  for 
economy  of  space,  §  is  used  for  soft  t:  tradi^onum. 
Cf.  preceding  MS. 

b)  Rule  observed.  Ihu,  Ipsa  and  Ilia.  Also  ludalsmo; 
als.  In  the  last  two  examples  the  i-longa  splits  at  the 
top  and  resembles  a  tall  y. 

Cf.  De  Bruyne  and  Tisserant,  Une  feuille  arabo- 
latine  de  Tepitre  aux  Galates,  in  Revue  Biblique, 
July  1910  (with  facsimile). 

22.  *Paris  Nouv.  Acq.  Lat.  238.      saec.  ix. 

a)  No  ^i-distinction:   discref^one  and  sta^im. 

b)  Rule  observed,  lUae  but  also  ille:  Ihu  and  ihu. 

Cf.  Delisle,  Melanges,  p.  60—1 :  "du  x«  siecle". 

23.  Escor.  PIG.      saec.  ix. 

a)  No  ^^-distinction:  contempla^ione  and  dedi^i. 

b)  Rule  observed. 

Cf.  Exempla,  pi.  XXVI:  "saec.  fere  decimo";  Bibl. 
P.  L.  H.,  p.  100:  "saec.  x — xi".  The  script  is  de- 
cidedly against  this  recent  date. 


h^ 


^)  These  few  leaves  were  formerly  attached  to  the  cover  of  "De- 
cretale 150"  in  the  chapter  library  of  Sigiienza,  where  they  were  dis- 
covered by  D.  De  Bruyne.  They  contain  a  unique  specimen  of  the  Latin 
and  Arabic  versions  of  St.  Paul's  Epistles,  and  for  the  present  are  pre- 
served in  the  Vatican  library. 


62 


12.  Abhandlung:  E.  A.  Loew 


24.  Albi  29.      saec.  ix. 

a)  No  ^/-distinction:  to^ius,  par/ibus,  orien^is.     §  is  used 
indifferently  but  more  often   for  soft  tL 

b)  Keguiar,  even  delnde,  deinc,  prolnde. 

Cf.  Facs.  in  Catalogue   general  des  nianuscrits  des 
bibliotheques  publiques  des  departements  I  (1849)  487. 

25.  "^La  Cava  I  (formerly  14)  Danila  Bible,     saec.  ix  post  med. 

a)  No  //-distinction:  genersitione  and  eun//bus. 

b)  Rule  observed:  Ibi,  Ibant,  but  illuc. 

Cf.  Facs.  in  Sylvestre,  Paleogr.  Universelle  III,  pi.  141 
and  two  plates  in  Cod.  Diplom.  Cavens.,  Tom  I,  Mano- 
scritti  Membranacei,  p.  1,  where  it  is  put  in  the 
8*^  century.  For  its  proper  date  see  A.  Amelli, 
De  libri  Barucli  vetustissima  latina  versione  etc.  Epis- 
toLa  ad  Antonium  M.  Ceriani  (Monte  Cassino  1902) 
])p.  7  and  14;  Berger.  Hist,  de  la  Vulg.,  p.  15. 
This  is  by  far  the  finest  product  of  Spanish  penmanship 
and  book-decoration  known  to  me. 

26.  Madrid.  Univ.  32.      saec.  ix  ut  vid. 

(D.  De  Bruyne's  photos.) 

a)  No  fi-distinction. 

b)  Rule  observed. 

Cf.  Facs.    in  Merino,    pi.  VI;    Berger,    Hist,   de  la 
Vulg.,  p.  15  et  sqq. 

27.  Toledo  Capitol.  99.  30.       saec.  ix. 

a)  No  /^-distinction:  e/iam,  at/aigo. 

b)  Rule  observed. 

Cf.  Exempla,  pi.  XV^I. 

28.  '^Paris  Nouv.  Acq.  Lat.  2168.      saec.  ix  ut  vid. 

a)  No  /i-distinction:  pes/ilenfia. 

b)  Rule  observed,  even  lUis. 

Cf.  Delisle,  Melanges,  p.  76  '*du  x®  siecle". 

29.  "^T  nchester  John  Rylands  Library  MS  Lat.  116. 

saec.  IX  ex.  ut  vid.     (Lindsay's  photo.) 
a)  No  ^/-distinction:  lustitla,  mentis,  cogita^ione. 


Studia  palaeographica. 


63 


b)  Rule  observed:  Iste,  Ipse,  Ideo,  Ille,  but  more  often 

ille;    also  ihs.     i-longa  with  forked  top  in  alt,  esalas  etc. 

Cf.  Facs.    in    New  Palaeographical    Society,    pi.  162. 

30.  *London  Add.  MS  30  852.      saec.  ix  ex.  ut  vid. 

a)  No  /^-distinction:  voca/ione,  ui/iorum  and  tlhi. 

b)  Rule  observed,   even  Ille. 

Cf.  Cat.  Add.  (1876—1881)  p.  121;  Facs.  in  Cat. 
of  Anc.  MSS  of  Brit.  Mus.  II,  pi.  37. 

31.  *Paris  Nouv.  Acq.  Lat.  2170  (Part  I),     saec.  ix  ut  vid. 

a)  No  fi-distinction:  etlam  and  cunc/is. 

b)  Rule  observed. 

Cf.  Delisle,  Melanges,  p.  79:  "peut  remonter  au 
X®  siecle". 

32.  Escor.  R  II  18  (f.  95—95^).      post  a.  882. 

This  folio  contains  the  famous  Oviedo  catalogue, 
a)  No  /^-distinction:  conla/ionum  and  can/?cum. 

Cf.  Munoz,  pi.  IV;  N.  A.  VI,  278;  Becker,  Catal. 
Bibl.  Antiq.,  p.  59;  Bibl.  P.  L.  H.,  p.  135;  Beer, 
p.  376  sqq. 

33.  Escor.  P  I  7.      saec.  ix  ex.  ut  vid.^) 

a)  No  ^/-distinction:   efiam,  la^inum,  ius^i^iam. 

b)  Rule    observed,    even    Ilia.     Forked    i-longa   in    alt, 
esalas. 

Cf.  Exempla,  pi.  XIV;  N.  A.  VI,  220,  n.  4;  Bibl. 
P.  L.  H.,  p.  101. 

34.  Escor.  T  II  25.     saec.  ix  ex.  ut  vid.    (Fr.  Manero's  photo.) 

a)  No  //-distinction:  po/ius,  mul//,  iustitle. 

b)  Rule   observed,   even   Illis,  prolnde.     Forked  i-longa 
in  alt. 


^)  This  and  the  following  MS  have  the  acrostic  Adefonsi  principis 
lihrum.  It  has  generally  been  assumed  that  this  referred  to  Alfonso  II 
(795—843).  As  the  writing  of  these  two  MSS  resembles  that  of  some 
dated  MSS  of  about  the  year  900,  I  am  inclined  to  believe  that  Alfonso  III 
(848—912)  is  meant,  especially  as  there  is  historical  evidence  for  books 
having  been  presented  by  the  latter  as  well  as  the  former.  Cf.  Beer, 
p.  376  and  379. 


64 


12.  Abhandlung:  E.  A.  Loew 


35.  *Paris  Nouv.  Acq.  Lat.  1298.      saec.  ix   ufc  vid. 

a)  No  ^i-distinction :  etisLin  and  an^icam. 

b)  Regular. 

Cf.  Delisle,  Mt^langes,  p.  108:  "minuscule  nu'lee 
de  cursive  du  xi^  siecle'\  Mixed  minuscule  and 
cursive  is  more  in  keeping  with  my  date. 

36.  *Paris  Nouv.  Acq.  Lat.  2167.      saec.  iX  ut  vid. 

a)  No  /i-distinction:  pes/ilen^/a. 

b)  Rule  observed,   even  Ihs  and  Illis. 

Cf.  Delisle,  Melanges,  p.  76:   "du  x*^  siecle". 

37.  *Paris  Nouv.  Acq.  Lat.  260.      saec.  ix  ut  vid. 

a)  No  ^^-distinction:   uitio  and  volupta/^s. 

b)  Rule  observed:   Id,  Ipse  but  illo. 

Cf.  Delisle,  Melanges,  p.  114:    "du  xi®  siecle". 

38.  *Paris  Lat.  10877   (cf.  Tours  615).      saec.  ix  ex.  ut  vid. 

a)  No  ^^-distinction:  totlus  and  grega^i. 

b)  Not  regular:  incumbere,  deinde  (with  short  i).  There 
is  something  foreign  about  this  MS. 

Cf.  Delisle,  Melanges,  p.  54:  "probablement  du 
X°  siecle''. 

39.  *Paris  Lat.  10876.      saec.  ix  ex.  ut  vid. 

a)  No  ^i-distinction:  conuersa^io  and  exconimunica^is. 

b)  Not  regular:  inter,  imperium,  ista,  proinde  (all  with 
short  i)  which  is  a  transgression  of  the  rule.  This  MS 
belongs  to  the  same  school  as  the  preceding. 

Cf  Delisle,  Melanges,  p.  54:  "probablement  du 
x^  siecle". 

40.  ^London  Add.  MS  30854.      saec.  ix  ex.  ut  vid. 

a)  No  #i-distinction. 

b)  Regular;  even  lUius. 

Cf.  Cat.  Add.  (1876-1881),    p.  121:    "x^^  cent.'\ 

41.  Escor.  I  III  13.       saec.  ix/x  ut  vid.       (Traube's  photo.). 

a)  No  ^i-distinction. 

b)  Regular. 

Cf.  Bibl.  P.  L.  H.,  p.  81:  "saec.  x". 


Studia  palaeographica. 


65 


42.  Madrid  Tolet.  14.  22   (now   10029).      saec.  ix/x   ut   vid. 

a)  Distinction  made  in  some  parts  and  not  in  others: 
e^iam,  parenfi  (no  distinction);  presena)a,  na^ique  (with 
distinction).  The  marginalia,  apparently  of  the  same  time, 
observe  the  distinction :   deprecaa)o. 

b)  Regular. 

Cf.  M.  G.  H.  Auctt.  Ant.  T.  Ill  2  (1879)  pp.  l  &  lit; 
ibid.facs;  N.  A.  VI,  316  and  581:  "saec.  x";  Bibl 
P.  L.  H.,  p.  284  "saec.  ix/x";  M.  G.  H.  Auctt.  Ant., 
T.  XIV,  p.  xxxviii. 

43.  "^London  Thompsonianus  97.^)      a.  894. 

a)  Distinction  made:  fora)a  but  ductile, 
a)  Regular,  even  Illi. 

Cf.  A  descriptive  catalogue  of  the  second  series  of 

50  MSS  in  the  collection  of  H.  Y.  Thompson  (1902) 

p.  304. 

44.  Madrid  Tolet.  43.  5   (now  10  064).      saec.  ix/x  ut  vid. 

a)  Distinction  made:  precedenq^um   but  ius/issime. 

b)  Regular;  but  illi,    also  prolbendum. 

Cf.  Exempla,  pi.  XVII:  "s.  ix  si  non  antiquior"; 
Bibl.  P.  L.  H.,  p.  299.  Reasons  for  my  date  are  given 
below,  p.  83  sq. 

45.  Madrid   Acad,  de  la  Hist.  20  (F.  186),^)   Hartel-Loewe 

no.  22.     saec.  ix/x  ut  vid.    The  Bible  of  San  Millan. 

a)  Distinction    made   in  first  part  of  MS:    tribulaa)one, 

but    angus^ia,    can^kum.      No   distinction    in   last  part  of 

MS,  which  is  by  a  different  hand.     The  marginalia  which 

are  added  make   the  distinction. 


^)  This  excellently  preserved  MS  (which  I  was  privileged  to  examine 
in  the  library  of  its  present  owner  to  whom  1  here  express  my  thanks) 
was  purchased  of  Lord  Ashburnham  in  1897.  The  script  is  manifestly 
of  the  late  9*^  or  early  10*^  century,  and  the  subscription  which  dates 
it  894  (era  932)  may  be  trusted. 

2)  The  entire  MS  has  been  photographed  for  the  Commission  on 
the  Vulgate.  D.  De  Bruyne,  one  of  its  members,  kindly  allowed  me  to 
examine  the  photogi-aphs. 

Sitzgsb.  d.philos.-philol.u.  d,  hist.  Kl.  Jahrg.1910.  12.  Abb.  5 


66 


12.  Abhandlung:  E.  A.  Loew 


b)  Regular,  even  lUis.  Also  slon,  ebralce,  with  forked 
i-longa. 

Cf.  Exempla,  pi.  XXV:  ''saec.  x";  N.  A.  VI,  332: 
"saec.  ix";  Bibl.  P.  L.  H.,  p.  500:  '^saec.  vm".  Accor- 
ding to  a  subscription  in  the  MS  its  date  is  6G2! 
Berger,  Hist,  de  la  Vulg.,  p.  16.  For  discussion  of 
the  date  see  below,  p.  84. 

46.  Madrid  Tolet.  10.  25  (now  10  007).       a.  902. 

a)  Distinction  made  by  first  scribe:  sena)unt  but  celes- 
t'lum.  Often  ^  is  used:  exeun§uni.  No  distinction  by 
second  scribe.  Here  the  work  of  the  corrector  can  be 
watched ;  he  adds  the  tail  to  i  where  t  is  assibilated. 
On  f.  47"^  eogam  seems  to  be  by  second  scribe.  The  scribe 
toward  the  end  of  the  book  uses  q)  lor  assibilated  tl. 
Likewise  a  later  entry  on  f.  147""  makes  the  distinction. 
These  valuable  details  I  have   from  W.  M.  Lindsay. 

b)  Regular,  but  illut,  illo.  The  second  scribe  has  Itaque 
occasionally  with  forked  i-longa. 

The  clubbed  shafts  of  tall  letters  tend  to  become  angular. 

Cf.  Exempla,  pi.  XIX;  Monaci,  Facs.  di  antichi  MSS, 
pi.  88;  Bibl.  P.  L.  H.,  p.  265. 

47.  Madrid  Tolet.  35.  1  (now  10  001).      saec.  ix/x  ut  vid. 

a)  No  fi-distinction:  ter^ia,  tihi. 

b)  Regular.     Forked  i-longa  in  alt,   efralm. 

Cf.  Exempla,  pi.  XX VIP;  Bibl.  P.  L.  H.,  p.  296: 
"saec.  ix/x'\ 

48.  Leon  Eccl.   Cathedr.  14.      saec.  x  in.      (Clark's   photo.) 

a)  No  ^i-distinction:   tihi  and  ratio. 

b)  Regular.      Shafts    of  tall  letters  have   angular  tops. 

Cf.  Beer-Diaz  Jimenez,  p.  15. 

4r».  Barcelona  Eivipullensis  49.      a.  911. 

a)  No  ^i-distinction:  letitia,  ahstinentie.  But  ^  is  used 
for  soft  ti  at  the  end  of  a  line:  senten^a. 

b)  Regular:   Ipsa,  Ihu,  even  Illis. 


Studia   palaeographica. 


67 


Cf.  Beer,  Die  Handschriften  des  Klosters  Santa 
Maria  de  Ripoll,  I  34  and  pi.  2  and  3  (see  above 
no.  18);  Steffens,  Lat.  Pal.^,  pi.  66  b  (=  54  of  1«*  ed.). 

50.  Escor.  a  I  13.      saec.  x  in. 

a)  Distinction  made:  Ius^iq)as,  diligena)a. 

b)  Regular,   even  Illi. 

Cf.  Munoz,  pi.  Y:  "a.  912";  Exempla,  pi.  XV: 
*'fortasse  a.  812";  N.  A.  VI,  226:  "saec.  ix";  BibL 
P.  L.  H.,  p.  10:  ''a.  912",  where  the  note  on  p.  13 
contains  Ewald's  discussion  of  the  date.  Beer  (p.  383 
note  and  p.  384  note  3)  favors  812;  Traube,  Text- 
geschichte  der  Regula  S.  Benedicti,  p.  64  (=  662). 
The  reasons  for  my  date  are  given  below,  p.  82  sq. 

51.  Manchester  John  Rylands  Library  MS  Lat.  93.    a.  914. 

Written    at   Cardena    by  Gomiz.      (Lindsay's  photo.) 

a)  No  //-distinction  by  original  scribes:  scien/iam,  potes- 
ta/ibus.  But  a  contemporary  corrector  makes  the  dis- 
tinction: acogo  (f.  58),   acogonibus  (f.  292). 

b)  Rule  observed,  but  ille,  ihs  (also  Ihs).  Forked  i-longa 
in  alt,   hiems,    ludalca. 

The  subscription  which  dates  the  MS  will  be  pub- 
lished by  Dr.  M.  R.  James  in  his  catalogue  of  the 
John   Rylands  MSS. 

52.  Escor.  T  II  24  (formerly  Q  II  24).    saec.  x  ut  vid.    See  pi.  5. 

a)  Distinction  made:  alqpus  but  latino,  quaesiqpo  but 
quaestio. 

b)  Regular. 

Cf.  Exempla,  pi.  VIII (older  literature  given) ;  Munoz, 
pi.  3;  N.  A.  VI,  272;  Bibl.  P.  L.  H.,  p.  112;  Beer, 
Praefatio  to  Tolet.  15.  8,  p.  XXIV;  Steffens,  Lat.  Pal.^, 
pi.  36  (=  SuppL,  pi.  17).  In  these  works  the  MS  is 
dated  saec.  vm,  saec.  vni/ix,  a.  733  or  743.  The  grounds 
on  which  my  date  is  based  are  given  below,  p.  81  sq. 

My  facsimile  I  owe  to  the  courtesy  of  Dr.  Franz 
Steffens  to  whom  I  here  express  my  thanks. 

5* 


68 


12.  Abhandlung:  E.  A.  Loew 


53.  Madrid  Tolet.  15.  12  (now  10  067).      a.  915. 

a)  No  fi-distinctioii  by  one  scribe:  e^^am,  perfecfionis. 
Distinction  made  by  another:  ecgani,  ])iit  per^^mescit.  See 
plate  4  containing  a  facsimile   of  both  hands. 

b)  llegiilar.  One  hand  writes  invariably  illius;  another 
has  Illo.''  Also  alt  with  forked  i-longa.  The  up-strokes 
of  the  scribe  who  makes  the  fi-distinction  are  strongly 
clubbed  and  often  tend  to  end  in  an  angle  —  a  feature  of 
the  early  10^^  century. 

Of.  Exempla,  pi.  XX;  Bibl.  P.  L.  H.,  p.  293. 

54.  Madrid  Acad,  de  la  Hist.  24  (F  188).     Hartel-Loewe, 

no.  25.      a.  917? 

a)  Distinction  made  by  first  scribe:^)  districaq)one.  No 
distinction  at  end  of  MS:   e^iam,  ra^io. 

b)  Regular.  In  first  part  even  Ille.  Forked  i-longa  in  Igne. 
The  script  is  not  the  compact  sort  of  the  9<^  century. 

Cf.  Exempla,  pi.  XXI;  N.  A.  VI,  332;  Bibl.  P.  L.  H., 
p.  503.  The  subscription  which  furnishes  the  date 
seems  to  have  been  tampered  wnth.    Cf.  pi.  in  Exempla. 

55.  Madrid  P  21  (now  1872).      saec.  x  in.  ut  vid. 

a)  Distinction  made:  graq)as  but  fdulo. 

b)  Regular. 

Cf.  Exempla,  pi.  XXVIII:  "saec.  x/xi".    The  script 

is  plainly  against  this  date. 

56.  Escor.  S  I  16.      saec.  x  in.  ut  vid. 

a)  No  //-distinction:   trisfi/ia. 

b)  Regular,     illius.     The  script  presents  a  strange  ap- 
pearance. 

Cf.  Exempla,  pi.  XXXVII:  "saec.xi  utvid";  Eguren, 

p.  82.     For  my  date  see  below,  p.  84  sq. 

57.  *Paris     Nouv.  Acq.  Lat.  238  (tly-leaf).      saec.  x  ut  vid. 

a)  Distinction  made:   posioQonem  but  mar/ires. 

b)  Regular. 

Cf.  reference  cited  to  no.  22. 


1)  These    facts    1  learn    from    W.  M.  Lindsay.     The  plate    in   the 
Exempla  reproduces  the  portion  where  no  distinction  is  made. 


Studia  palaeographica. 


69 


58.  *London  Add.  MS  25600.      a.  919. 

a)  Distinction  made:    pudicia)a,   ius^iogae,   but  fniieant. 

b)  Regular,   even  Illis. 

Cf.  Cat.  Add.  (1854-75)  p.  208;  Facs.  Pal.  Soc, 
pi.  95;  Arndt-Tangl  II,  pi.  36;  Cat.  Anc.  MSS  Brit. 
Mus.  II,  pi.  38. 

The  shafts  of  the  letters  h,  d,  h,  i-longa  and  I 
have  a  prefix  (or  serif)  at  the  top  consisting  of  a 
small  stroke  made  obliquely  from  left  to  right  and 
upwards.  In  some  MSS  it  is  made  at  a  right  angle 
with  the  main  shaft  and  often  extends  beyond  it  thus 
giving  it  the  form  of  a  mallet-head  (cf.  pi.  5,  6,  7). 
This  graphic  feature  is  noteworthy,  as  it  is  lacking 
in  MSS  of  the  preceding  periods. 

59.  Leon  Eccl.  Cathedr.  6.      a.  920.      (Clark's  photo.) 

a)  Distinction  made:  edia)onem  but  legeri^is. 

b)  Regular. 

Cf.  Beer-Diaz  Jimenez,  p.  5;  Berger,  Hist,  de  la 
Vulg.,  p.  17. 

60.  Madrid  Tolet.  11.  3.    a.  945.    (Kept  in  Vitrina  2%  Sala  l\) 

(Haseloff's  photo.) 

a)  Distinction  regularly  made  by  one  scribe:  inia)um, 
uia)is  but  extitit.  Yet  another  scribe  (to  judge  from  the 
facsimile  in  Munoz)  seems  unsteady  in  his  use,  for  he 
makes  the  distinction  in  some  words  and  not  in  others: 
silena}um  (1.  1)  but  silen/mm  (1.  6);  contemplaa)onis  (1.  7) 
but  contempla^^onum  (1.  4).  The  examples  are  from  Muiioz' 
facsimile. 

b)  Regular.  The  tops  of  tall  letters  have  a  prefix. 
Cf.  no.  58. 

Cf.  Munoz,  pi.  VI  and  p.  117. 

61.  *London  Add.  MS  30844.     saec.  x  ut  vid. 

a)  Distinction  made:  precgum. 

b)  Regular,   even  Ilia. 

Cf.  Cat.  Add.  (1876-1881),  p.  119. 


70 


12.  Abhandlunsr :  E.   A.  Loew 


62.  Madrid  Acad,  de  la  Hist.  25    (F  194),    Hartel-Loewe, 

no.  8.     a.  946. 

a)  Distinction  made:  pif:jriq)am  but  timore,  celesfia. 

b)  Regular,  even  Ille;  forked  i-longa  in  hebralca. 

Cf.  Exempla,  pi.  XXII;  N.  A.  VI,  331;  Bibl.  V. 
L.  IL,  p.  493. 

63.  Manchester  John  Rylands  Library  MS  Lat.  99.    a.  949. 

Written  at  Cardena.      (Lindsay's  photo.) 

a)  Distinction  made:    poenitenqpani,    tribulaogo   but  sa- 
lufis,  ^imore. 

b)  Regular.      The    tops    of  tall   letters    have   a  prefix. 
Cf.  no.  58. 

The  subscription  which  dates  and  places  this  MS 
will  be  given  by  Dr.  M.  R.  James  in  his  forth- 
coming catalogue  of  the  John  Rylands  MSS. 

64.  *Paris  2855  (part  II).      ca.  a.  951. 

a)  Distinction  made:   acq)onem,  but  deser^^  and  moles- 
^iarum. 

b)  Regular,    yet  ihm,  ilium. 

The  tops  of  the  tall  letters  have  a  prefix.    Cf.  no.  58. 

Cf.  Delisle,  Melanges,  p.  53,  where  older  liter- 
ature is  cited;  Facs.  see  Sylvestre,  Paleog.  Univ.  Ill, 
pi.  206;  Facs.  de  I'ecole  des  chartes,  pi.  277. 

65.  Escor.  a  II  9.      a.  954. 

a)  Distinction  made:  profanaa)onibus  but  cuncfe 

b)  Regular. 

Script  not  compact.  Tlie  tall  shafts  tbicken  at 
the  top  in  a  triangular  form. 

Cf.  Exempla,  pi.  XXIII;  Bibl.  P.  L.  H.,  p.  19. 

66.  *Paris  Nouv.  Acq.  Lat.  239.      saec.  x. 

a)  Distinction  made:  tris^ia}e  but  celes/ia. 
Cf.  Delisle,  Melanges,  p.  78. 

67.  Leon  Eccl.  Cathedr.  21  (additions  on  a  page  left  blank). 

saec.  x.    (D.  De  Bruyne's  photo.) 
a)  Distinction  made. 


Studia  palaeographica. 


71 


The  script  may  even  be  more  recent.  It  shows 
foreign  influence,  e.  g.  p  =  prae;  p  with  superior 
o  =  pro ;  m  with  apostrophe  =  mus,  etc.  The  Catal- 
ogue by  Beer- Jimenez  does  not  describe  these  additions. 

68.  *Floren.  Laur.  Ashburnh.  17.      saec.  x  ex.  ut  vid. 

a)  Distinction  made:   generaor)onem  but  tibi. 

b)  Regular,  even  Ilia,  Illius,  Illi. 

The  tops  of  the  tall  letters  have  a  prefix.    Cf.  no.  58. 

Cf.  Facs.  in  Collez.  Fiorent.,  pi.  33;  Rivista  delle 
Bibl.  e  degli  Archivi  XIX  (1908)  p.  5.  See  above 
p.  52,  n.  1. 

69.  Madrid  Acad,  de  la  Hist.  F  212.     Hartel-Loewe,  no.  44. 

saec.  X  ex.  ut  vid. 
a)  Distinction  made:  spaq)um  but  complec^^tur. 

The  tops  of  the  tall  letters  have  a  prefix.    Cf.  no.  58. 

Cf.  Exempla,  pi.  XXIV:  "a.  964";  N.  A.  VI,  334: 
"saec.  x";  Bibl.  P.  L.  H.,  p.  514:   "saec.  xi". 

70.  *Paris  Nouv.  Acq.   Lat.  2170  (last  22  leaves). 

saec.  x  ut  vid. 
a)  Distinction  made:  ins^^tua)onis,  oraogone. 
Cf.  Delisle,  Melanges,  p.  79. 

71.  *London  Add.  MS  30846.      saec.  x  ut  vid. 

a)  Distinction  made:  supplicaa)one  but  pecca^is. 
Cf.  Cat.  Add.  (1876-1881)  p.  120. 

72.  *London  Add.  MS  30845.      saec.  x  ut  vid. 

a)  Distinction  made:  cessaa}one  but  pecca^is. 

Cf.  Cat.  Add.,  p.  120;  Facs.  in  The  Musical  No- 
tation of  the  Middle  Ages  (London  1890)  pi.  I. 

73.  Escor.  d  I  2.      a.  976.      (Traube's  photo.) 

a)  Distinction  made:  raq)one,  sacerdo/^bus. 

b)  Regular.    Forked  i-longa  in  laici.    Tops  of  tall  letters 
have  prefixes. 

Cf.  N.  A.  VI,  238;  Bibl.  P.  L.  H.,  p.  43;  Facs.  in 
N.  A.  VIII,  357,  containing  a  line  of  script  and  one 
of  arabic  numerals,  perhaps  the  earliest  example  in 
a  western  MS. 


ii 


72 


12.  Abhandlung:  E.  A.  Loew 


74.  *Paris  Nouv.  Acq.  Lat.  2180.      ante  a.  992. 

a)  Distinction  made:  eqjam,  ius/ia)a,  but  iuventu^^. 

b)  Regular;   Ibi  but  illi. 

Cf.  Delisle,  Melanges,  p.  101. 

75.  Escor.  d  I  1.      a.  992. 

a)  Distinction  made:  oblaq)ones  but  re/inent. 

b)  Regular.  The  tops  of  tall  letters  have  a  prefix.  Cf.no.  o8. 

Cf.  Exempla,  pi.  XXVII  b;   N.  A.  VI,  236;    Bibl. 
P.  L.  H.,  p.  43. 

76.  *Paris  Nouv.  Acq.  Lat.  1296.      saec.  x  ut  vid. 

a)  Distinction  made:  aucqjo  but  es/hno,  congesfio.  This 
is  perhaps  the  oldest  Latin  MS  on  paper;  sheets  of  vellum 
are  interspersed. 

Cf.  Delisle,  Melanges,  p.  109:    "du  xif  siecle". 

77.  *Londoii  Add.  MS  30851.      saec.  x/xi  ut  vid. 

a)  Distinction  made:   s^ilancga. 

b)  Regular,  even  lUud. 

The  tops  of  the  tall  letters  have  a  prefix.  Cf.  no.  58. 
Cf.  Cat.  Add.  (1876-1881)  p.  120. 

78.  *London  Add.  MS  30847.      saec.  xi  ut  vid. 

a)  Distinction  made. 

Cf.  Cat.  Add.  (1876-1881)  p.  120. 

79.  *Paris  Nouv.  Acq.  Lat.  2179.      saec.  xi  ut  vid. 

a)  Distinction  made  :Indignaq)o  but  quaesfionarii,  vestigia. 
Cf.  Delisle,  Melanges,  p.  95. 

80.  Escor.  e  I  13.      saec.  xi  ut  vid. 

a)  Distinction  made:  geronq)us  but  ualen^aius. 

b)  Regular,  even  lUud. 

Tall  letters  are  very  long  and  have  a  prefix  at  the 
top.    Cf.  no   58. 

Cf.  Exempla,  pi.  XXIX.      *'saec.  x/xi." 

81.  *Londoii  Add.  MS  30850.      saec.  xi  ut  vid. 

a)  Distinction  made:   oraa}one  but  uolupta^i. 

Cf.  Cat.  Add.  (1876-1881)  p.  120;   Facs.  in  The 
Musical  Notation  of  the  Middle  Ages,  pi.  IV. 


Studia  palaeographica. 


73 


82.  *Paris  Nouv.  Acq.  Lat.  2178.      saec.  xi  ut  vid. 

a)  Distinction  made:  paa)en^?s. 

Cf.  Delisle,  Melanges,   p.  85;  Facs.   pi.  II  in  catal- 
ogue of  sale  (1878). 

83.  Escor.  &  II  5.      saec.  xi  ut  vid.      (Clark's  photo.) 

a)  Distinction  made:    paqr)enq)a  but  odis^i. 

b)  Regular. 

Cf.  Bibl.  P.  L.  H.,  p.  75. 

84.  Madrid  Tolet.  35.  2  (now  10110).      saec.  xi. 

a)  Distinction  made:  Insurgena)um. 

Cf.  Exempla,  pi.  XXX.  The  date  "a.  1006''  is 
ffiven  in  index  on  the  authority  of  Merino.  But 
there  is  much  uncertainty  in  connection  with  this 
date.  The  script  is  very  ill-formed  and  may  be  older 
than  saec.  xr. 

85.  *Paris  Nouv.  Acq.  Lat.  235.     saec.  xi  ut  vid. 

a)  Distinction  made:  aedificaoc)0  but  ])ro^inus,  modesfiam. 
The  tops  of  the  tall  letters  have  a  prefix.  Cf.  no.  58. 
Cf.  Delisle,  Melanges,  p.  75. 

86.  *Paris  Nouv.  Acq.  Lat.  2176.     saec.  xi  ut  vid. 

a)  Distinction  made:  raogone  but  multi. 

Cf.  Delisle,  Melanges,  p.  70;  Facs.  pi.  IV  in  catal- 
ogue of  sale  (1878). 

87.  *Paris  Nouv.  Acq.  Lat.  2177.     saec.  xi  ut  vid. 

a)  Distinction  made:  Iusfiq)ae,  paq)enfi. 

I  noted  lustida  (p.  473).    The  use  of  ci  for  soft  ti 
begins    to  creep   into  MSS    during  the  11"*  century, 
and  is  often  found  after  that  time.    —    The  tops  of 
the  tall  letters  have   a  prefix.     Cf.  no.  58. 
Cf.  Delisle,  Melanges,  p.  71. 

88.  Escor.  &  I  3.      a.   1047.      (Clark's  photo.) 

a)  Distinction  made:    iaa)onem  but  con^inet. 

The  tops  of  tall  letters  have  a  prefix.     Cf.  no.  58. 
Cf.  Munoz,  pi.  XI,  p.  121;  Beer,  p.  218. 


74 


12.  Abhcindlun*,':  E.  A.  Loew 


89.  *London  Add.  MS  30855.      saec.  xi  iit  vid. 

a)   Distinction  made. 

Cf.  Cat.  Add.  (187G-1881)  ]).  122. 

90.  Madrid  Nacion.    (Beatus  super  Apocalypsim.) 

a.  1037      1065.      Now   kept   in    Yitrina  1%    Sala  P. 

a)  Distinction  made:  ea)am  but  al/^'tudo. 

b)  Regular:  alt  with  forked  i-longa. 

Cf.  Munoz,  pi.  XII  (where  no  press-mark  is  given). 

91.  Madrid  Nacion (Forum  judicum  from  Loon.) 

a.   1058.      Now  kej)t  in  Vitrina  4*,  Sabi  I\ 

a)  Distinction  made:  preq)o  but  faculta^ibus. 

b)  The  tops   of  tall  letters  have  a  prefix.     Cf.  no.  58. 

Cf.  Munoz,  pi.  XIII  (no  press-mark). 

9±  Madrid  Acad,  de  la  Hist.  F  211.    ITartel-Loewe,   no.  47. 
saec.  XI  ut  vid. 

a)  Distinction  made:  quaesia}0. 

b)  TJegular,  but  illius.  The  tops  of  tall  letters  have  a 
prefix.     Cf.  no.  58. 

Cf.  Exempla,  pi.  XXXVI. 

93.  Madrid  Eoyal  Private  Library  2  J  5.      a.  1059. 

a)  Distinction  made:  graoja  but  salu^is. 

b)  Regular,  but  illo.  The  tops  of  tall  letters  have  a 
prefix.     Cf.  no.  58. 

Cf.  Exempla.  pi.  XXXII. 

94.  Madrid  A  115  (now  112).     saec.  xi  (a.  1063?) 

a)  Distinction  made:  negoq)is. 

b)  Not  regular:  in  often  with  short  L  Sign  of  decay 
of  script.  The  tall  letters  have  a  prefix  occasionally,  as 
a  rule  they  thicken  at  the  top  in  the  form   of  a  triangle. 

Cf.  Exempla,    pi.  XXXlll    whence    Arndt-Tangl*, 

pi.  8d. 

95.  Madrid  A  2  (now  2).  saec.  xi  ut  vid.  (D.  DeBruyne's  photo.) 

a)  Distinction  made. 

Cf.  Berger,  Hist,  de  la  Vulg.,  p.  20. 


Studia  palaeogjraphica.  '^ 

96.  *Paris  Nouv.  Acq.  Lat.  2171.     ante  a.  1067. 

a)  Distinction  made:  lus^iogam,  forogores. 

b)  Regular,  but  ilium. 

Cf.    Delisle,    Melanges,    p.  68:    "premiere    moitie 
du   xi^siecle";  Ferotin,  Le  liber  ordinum,  p.  xni. 

97.  Leon  Eccl.  Cathedr.  2.     a.  1071.     (Clark's  photo.) 

a)  Distinction  made:    iusf/q)am. 

b)  Regular. 

Cf.  Beer-Diaz  Jimenez,  p.  2. 

98.  '^Taris  Nouv.  Acq.  Lat.  2169.    completed  a.  1072. 

a)  Distinction  made:    raq)one  l)ut  imitit  ques^io. 

b)  Regular.  The  tops  of  tall  letters  have  a  prefix.  Cf.  no.  58. 

Cf  Delisle,   Melanges,   p.  107 ;    Ferotin,    Le   liber 
ordinum,  p.  XXXIII. 

99.  *London  Add.  MS  30848.     saec.  xi  ut  vid. 

a)  Distinction  made. 

b)  Regular:    Ilia  and  illuc. 

Cf.  Cat.  Add.  (1876-1881)  p.  120. 

100.  Madrid  Acad,  de  la  Hist.  F  192.    Hartel-Loewe,  no.  29. 

a.  1073. 

a)  Distinction  made:  lecq)o  but  nocfis. 

b)  Regular,  but  ilia.    The  shafts  of  the  tall  letters  have 
a  prefix.    Cf.  no.  58. 

Cf.  Exempla,  pi.  XXXV;  N.  A.  VI,  332. 

101.  Madrid  R  216  (now  6367).     a.  1105. 

a)  Distinction  made:    fornicaq)onem. 

b)  Regular,  but  ilia. 

Cf.  Exempla,  pi.  XXXVIII. 

102.  *London  Add.  MS  11695.     a.  1109  (or  1091).^) 

a)  Distinction  made:  condiogone  but  consfituta. 

b)  Regular:    Ipsius,  even  Ilia. 

The  tops  of  tall  letters  have  a  prefix.    Cf.  no.  58. 

Cf.  Delisle,  Melanges,  p.  60;  Facs.  Pal.  Soc,  pi.  48, 
49;  Arndt-TangP,  pi.  37;  Facs.  de  Fecole  des  chartes. 
no.  353.    Colored  facs.  in  Westwood's  Pal.  Sacra  Pict. 

1)  The  subscription    which   gives  us  the  date   is    not   quite  clear. 
Cf.  Prou,  Manuel  de  Paleogr.3  (1910)  p.  101,  note  4. 


76 


12.  Abhandlung:  K.  A.  Loew 


Studia  palaeographica. 


77 


103.  Madrid  Archiv.  Hist.  Nacion.  989-B.  Vitrina  40.  a.  1 1 10. 

a)  palado:  ci  is  used  for  assibilated  ti.  The  spelling 
on  the  whole  is  that  of  an  ignorant  notary. 

Cf.  Facs.  in  Mufioz,  pi.  XIV  (where  no  press  mark 
is  given). 

104.  *Rome  Corsinian.  369  (formerly  40  E  6).     saec.  xii. 

a)  Distinction  made  in  Visigothic  portion:  cogniogo, 
persecua}onis.  The  non-Yisigothic  hand  often  writes  ci 
for  assibilated  ti. 

In  Visigothic  script  are  ff.  144 — 156  and  additions  on 
f.  106.^)  The  rest  of  the  MS  is  in  ordinary  minuscule  by 
contemporaneous  hand.  This  is  the  sixth  example  known 
to  me  of  a  Spanish  MS  in  Italy.  It  has  been  correctly 
described  by  Zacarias  Garcia:  Un  nuevo  manuscritto  del 
comentario  sobre  el  apocalipsis  de  San  Beato  de  Liebana, 
in  Razon  y  Fe  XII  (August  1905)  p.  478-493.  The 
MS  is  palaeographically  very  instructive.  The  Visigothic 
script  in  it  is  impure,  showing  a  mixture  of  ancient  and 
foreign  elements,  especially  in  the  abbreviations.  The 
tops  of  tall  letters  as  in  other  recent  MSS  have  a  prefix. 
Cf.  pi.  7. 


The  above  evidence  is  instructively  supplemented  by  a 
consideration  of  the  following  corrections  and  additions,  and 
by  the  testimony  of  notarial  documents. 

In  Escorial  T  II  24  (formerly  Q  II  24)  on  line  6  of  folio  73 
(cf.  Exempla,  pi.  VIII)  the  scribe  originally  wrote  qiiesitio  with 
the  assibilated  form  of  ti.  The  word  however  should  have 
been  qnestio.  The  corrector  who  crossed  out  the  superfluous  i 
also  changed  the  form  of  the  second  i. 


1)  The  additions  it  seems  escaped  the  notice  of  Garcia.  As  they 
occur  in  the  non-Visigotliic  portion  of  the  MS  they  furnish  further  evid- 
ence for  his  contention  that  the  whole  MS  was  written  in  Spain. 


\\ 


One  of  the  scribes  of  Madrid  Tolet.  10.  25,  a.  902  does 
not  make  the  ^i-distinction.  In  this  part  of  the  MS  the  activity 
of  the  corrector  is  plainly  noticeable:  he  adds  the  tail  to  the  i 
where  ti  has  the  soft  sound. 

The  scribe  or  scribes  of  Manchester  John  Uylands  Library 
MS  93  make  no  distinction,  but  contemporary  additions  have 
it  (f.  58,  292)  and  a  later  corrector  changes  the  ordinary  form 
of  ti  to  o)  where  it  is  assibilated,  e.  g.  on  f.  129. 

The  MS  Madrid  Acad,  de  la  Hist.  F  186  shows  a  wavering 
in  the  matter  of  the  ^^-distinction.  The  marginalia,  which 
seem  to  me  by  a  later  hand,  invariably  observe  it.  The  same 
indecision  with  regard  to  the  ti-usage  is  found  in  Madrid 
Tolet.  10.  25.    The  later  entry  on  f.  147^  makes  the  distinction. 

The  documents  which  I  have  been  able  to  study  in  the 
facsimiles  of  Munoz  furnish  data  which  may  fairly  be  regarded 
as  confirming  the  evidence  of  the  MSS.^) 

In  a  document  of  857  (Mufioz,  pi.  16)  §  is  used  for  assi- 
bilated ti,  but  not  o).^) 

In  a  document  of  898  —  929  (Munoz,  pi.  17)  no  distinction 
is  made,  ci  doing  service  for  assibilated  ti.  But  in  a  document  of 
904  (Munoz,  pi.  18)  we  have  the  distinction:  preq:)o  but  dedisfis. 

It  is  needless  to  enumerate  the  later  documents.  As  a 
rule  the  distinction  is  made  as  in  MSS.  Occasionally  it  happens 
that  o)  is  used  indiscriminately  (cf.  Munoz,  pi.  22  and  41).  In 
the  more  recent  documents  ci  is  used  for  assibilated  ti.  Yet 
in  a  document  of  1137  (Munoz,  pi.  42)  the  two  forms  of  ti 
are  still  strictly  differentiated:  uendiq}ones  but  tih\. 


0  The  earliest  examples  of  Visigothic  cursive  show  no  a'-distinction, 
as  we  learn  from  the  cursive  pages  of  Autun  27  (cf.  p.  52,  n.  1).  There 
is  likewise  no  distinction  in  the  Escorialensis  of  Augustine  (Camarin  de 
las  reliquias)  in  the  cursive  part  containing  the  Benedictio  cerei.  But 
this  writing,  as  Traube  has  pointed  out  (Nomina  Sacra,  p.  191,  note  1), 
must   not  be  regarded   as  Spanish. 

2)  In  the  cursive  portion  of  Escor.  R  II  18  (ante  a.  779)  assibilated  ii 
is  regularly  represented  by  ^.  The  same  is  true  of  the  additions  in 
cursive  found  in  many  MSS  posterior  to  the  8t^»  century. 


78 


12.  Abhandlungr:  E.  A.  Loew 


Studia  palaeographica. 


79 


A  study  of  the  usage  illustrated  by  the  foregoing  data 
gives  us  the  folloAving  facts  with  regard  to  f^-forms  in  Visi- 
gothic  MSS. 

1.  The  distinction  is  never  found  in  MSS  which  are  in- 
disputably of  the  8*^*^  or  early  9^'*  century. 

2.  The  distinction  is  invariably  made  in  the  more  recent 
MSS,  beginning  (to  use  the  safest  limits)  with  the  second 
half  of  the  10'*'  century  and  extending  to  the  12^'S  i.  e.  as 
long  as  the  script  lasts. 

3.  Certain  MSS,  written  between  the  two  periods  indicated 
show  a  wavering  in  usage,  one  scribe  making  the  distinction 
and  another  not;  or  one  scribe  making  it  in  some  cases  and 
not  in  others. 


There  can  be  but  one  interpretation  of  these  facts.  The 
custom  of  making  the  ^i-distinction  in  book-script  was  con- 
sciously introduced.  This  graj)liic  innovation,  which  on  the 
face  of  it  has  something  formal  and  conventional  (since  the 
ligature  §  which  did  service  for  assibilated  ti  in  cursive  was 
rejected  as  unsuitable  in  book-hand),  was  in  all  probability  in- 
troduced in  connection  with  liturgical  books,  where  a  need 
was  felt  of  facilitating  the  reading  aloud.  The  form  o)  was 
to  tell  the  reader  at  once  that  he  should  give  the  soft  sound 
of  t.  As  such  scribal  changes,  however,  are  adopted  slowly, 
and  reach  some  schools  much  sooner  than  others,  it  need  not 
surprise  us  that  scribes  of  one  school  should  continue  in  the 
old  way  long  after  those  of  another  had  adopted  the  new 
one.  The  absence  of  the  ^i-distinction  may  therefore  say  less 
to  us  than  its  presence.  Its  presence  is  at  once  a  hint 
that  the  MS  is  not  of  the  oldest  kind.  But  there  are 
MSS  in  which  one  scribe  makes  the  distinction  and  another 
does  not.^)  These  are  manifestly  MSS  of  the  transition  period, 
in  which  the  struggle  between  the  old  and  the  new  can  l)e 
witnessed,  the  younger  scribe  adopting  the  innovation,  the  older 


persisting  in  his  old-fashioned  way  as  he  had  been  taught. 
The  fact  that  these  MSS  were  written,  as  the  dated  as  well 
as  the  undated  MSS  show,  precisely  in  the  interval  between 
two  periods  the  first  of  which  displays  the  invariable  absence, 
the  second  the  invariable  presence  of  the  distinction,  is  the 
best  possible  proof  that  the  custom  of  making  the  distinction 
was  then  in  the  actual  process  of  adoption  by  the  various 
schools  of  Spain.  The  question  as  to  which  centre  was  first 
to  practice  the  distinction  and  which  were  the  centres  more 
backward  about  doing  so  must  be  left  for  further  investigation. 

What  are  the  more  precise  limits  of  the  transition  period? 
The  earliest  dated  example  known  to  me  of  a  MS  with  the 
^i-distinction  is  Thompsonianus  97,  written,  according  to  a 
subscription,  in  the  year  894.  As  the  form  of  the  letters  cor- 
responds to  that  of  other  dated  MSS  of  the  same  time,  there 
is  no  reason  for  questioning  the  originality  of  the  subscription. 
The  latest  dated  example  know^n  to  me  of  a  MS  in  which  the 
scribe  shows  insecurity  in  his  usage  is  of  the  year  945.^)  As 
several  dated  MSS  which  fall  between  894  and  945  show  the 
/i-distinction  (at  least  by  one  hand),  it  is  fair  to  consider  these 
two  dates  as  the  extreme  limits  of  the  transition  period.  From 
all  this  it  must  follow  that  a  MS  w^ithout  the  dis- 
tinction is  in  all  probability  older  than  894  (as  many 
MSS  of  the  type  of  Thompsonianus  97  still  ignore 
the  distinction);  that  on  the  other  hand  a  MS  with 
the  ^^-distinction  is  hardly  older  than  894,  and  in 
most  cases  much  younger. 

The  MSS  which  may  be  pointed  out  as  disputing  the  cri- 
terion just  formulated  are,  I  believe,  so  few  in  number  that 
they  could  fairly  be  regarded  as  mere  exceptions  to  a  rule. 
But    such    MSS     remain    exceptions   only    if   we   accept  their 


^)  Cf.  in  my  list  the  numbers  42,  45.  4G,  5o,  54  and  GO. 


^)  Cf.  no.  60  of  list.  It  is  only  fair  to  note  that  this  statement  is 
based  on  a  facsimile  of  Munoz  which  is  less  trustworthy  than  a  photo- 
graph. The  photographs  which  I  had  of  this  MS  showed  the  distinction 
regularly. 


I 


80 


12.  Abhandlung:  E.  A.  Loew 


traditional  dates.^)  If  we  can  sliow  those  dates  to  be  un- 
tenable or  improbable  on  |)alaeograpliical  grounds  the  validity 
of  the  ^i-criterion  will  thus  at  once  be  both  tested  and  con- 
firmed. This  T  shall  attempt  to  do.  I  preface  my  argument 
with  a  few  remarks  on  the  script  as  such. 

Briefly,    we    may  distinguish  four  stages  of  develo|)ment: 

a)  The  first  stage  is  exemplified  in  the  oldest  MSS,  saec. 
viii— IX.  The  script  has  striking  compactness.  The  pen-stroke  is 
not  fine.  The  shaftless  letters  are  rather  broad,  the  arcs  of 
m,  n  and  h  are  low;  their  last  stroke  turns  in.  The  separation 
of  words  is  imperfect.  The  })oint  of  interrogation  is  usually 
a  later  addition.  The  suspensions  Ims  and  que  are  generally 
denoted  by  a  semi-colon  placed  above  h  and  q  (cf.  pi.  8). 

b)  The  second  stage  is  illustrated  by  the  MSS  of  the 
end  of  the  9*^  and  the  beginning  of  the  lO**'  century.  The 
script  is  looser  and  larger;  the  shafts  of  tall  letters  are  club- 
shaped;  the  shaftless  letters  have  more  height  than  breadth; 
the  final  stroke  of  m,  w,  h  often  turns  out.  The  separation 
of  words  is  more  distinct;  the  interrogation  point  is  used. 
The  suspensions  hus  and  que  are  represented  now  by  means  of 
the  semi-colon,  now  by  means  of  an  s-like  flourish  (cf.  pi.  4). 

c)  The  third  stage  is  seen  in  MSS  of  the  10*''  and  1 1*'> 
centuries.  The  letters  are  better  spaced;  the  pen-stroke  is 
often  fine.  The  body  of  the  letters  is  rather  tall  and  narrow. 
The  final  stroke  of  m,  w,  h  etc.  regularly  turns  out.  Particu- 
larly characteristic  are  the  shafts  of  tall  letters,  which  end 
in  a  little  hook  or  mallet-head.  The  suspensions  hus  and  que 
are  denoted  by  an  s-like  flourish  placed  above  h  and  (/,  i.  e.  the 
semi-colon  of  the  first  stage  is  here  made  in  one  convention- 
alized stroke  (cf.  plates  5  and  6). 


1)  Although  with  great  hesitation,  I  have  ventured  to  disagree  with 
the  date  given  by  Delisle  in  the  case  of  nos.  35  and  37  of  my  list.  If 
his  dates  are  correct,  I  should  be  at  a  loss  to  explain  the  //  usage  in 
these  MSS. 


Studia  palaeographica. 


81 


d)  The  last  stage  of  the  script  is  characterized  by  the 
decay  and  awkwardness  of  the  old  forms  and  the  employment 
of  foreign  elements  (cf.  plate  7). 

We  are  now  in  a  position  to  test  the  fi-criterion.  I  select 
first  the  most  important  exception.  The  MS  Escor.  T  II  24 
(formerly  QII24)^)  containing  the  Etymologies  of  Isidore  has 
long  enjoyed  the  distinction  of  being  the  oldest  dated  MS  in 
the  script  (see  plate  5).  The  traditional  date  is  733  or  743. 
A  computal  note  in  the  text  (f.  68)  says:  ^'usque  in  hanc  pre- 
sentem  erani  que  est  BCCLXXl"  which  is  the  year  733.  A  few 
lines  below  occurs:  '^iisque  in  hanc  praefatam  BCCLXXXI 
crani^  which  is  the  year  743.  One  of  these  dates  is  plainly 
wrong.  From  the  calculation  in  the  text  it  appears  that  743 
is  the  correct  year.  In  the  judgment  of  Eguren,  Munoz  y 
Rivero,  Ewald  and  Loewe,  Beer  and  Stefi'ens,  not  to  mention 
older  authorities,  the  script  did  not  seem  to  belie  the  date 
established  by  the  computal  note.  Stefi'ens  gives  743  as  the 
date  of  his  facsimile,  but  he  is  cautious  enough  to  add:  "unter 
der  Voraussetzung,  dais  jene  Eintragung  ein  Original  ist  und 
nicht  etwa  eine  Abschrift  aus  einem  anderen  Codex".  R.  Beer, 
in  his  learned  Praefatio  to  the  reproduction  of  the  Toletanus 
15.  8  compared  that  MS  with  Escor.  T  II  24,  thus  trying  to 
determine  the  age  of  the  undated  MS  by  the  aid  of  the  pre- 
sumably dated  one.  He  says  of  our  MS:  "litterae  sunt  ali- 
quanto  altiores  ductusque  magis  tenues",  thus  pointing  out 
essential  difl'erences.  But  when  he  continues  and  says  ''sed 
utriusque  libri  scriptura,  ut  ex  Exempl.  Scr.  Visig.  tab.  VIII 
et  ex  tab.  17  supplementi  Steff'ensiani  perspicere  licet,  in  uni- 
versum  non  est  dispar",  he  seems  to  me  to  be  withdrawing  his 
earlier  judgment  just  quoted.  It  is  also  plain  that  a  certain 
calligraphic  difference  escaped  Beer's  notice:  one  MS  uses  only 
one  form  for  ti,  the  other  two  distinct  forms.  But  indeed 
a  careful  examination  of  the  script  of  the  Escorialensis  will 
disclose    other  traits   foreign    to   the  oldest  type   of  Visigothic 


^)  For  literature  see  no.  52  of  the  list. 
Sitzgsb.d.  pliilos.-philol.  u.  d.  bist.Kl.  Jahrg.  1910, 12.  Abh. 


82 


12.  Abhandlunsr:  E.  A.  Loew 


Studia  pulaeo<]fraphica. 


83 


writing.  Foremost  is  the  general  impression  already  noted  by 
Beer:  the  proportions  of  the  letters,  their  relation  to  one  an- 
other. It  is  plainly  not  the  old,  compact,  broadly-flowing 
writing.  In  the  oldest  MSS  the  m  and  7i  and  the  arch  of  h 
all  turn  in.  In  the  Escorialensis  and  the  more  recent  MSS 
these  strokes  thicken  at  the  end  and  turn  out.  In  the  older 
type  the  letter  g  has  often  a  rather  short  and  curved  down- 
stroke,  in  the  Escorialensis  and  the  more  recent  type  of  MSS 
it  is  very  long.  But  the  unfailing  ear-mark  of  the  recent 
type  is  the  hook  or  mallet-shaped  end  of  the  shafts  of  ft,  d, 
h,  i-lon(ja  and  L  which  is  unknown  in  the  oldest  MSS.  The 
Escorialensis  has  such  shafts.^)  The  abbreviation  sign  over 
h  and  q  for  hus  and  que  has  the  form  of  an  uncial  s  as  in  the 
more  recent  type  of  MSS  (cf.  plate  5).  —  In  short,  purely 
graphic  considerations  are  against  the  traditional  date  of  743. 
I  may  state  my  conviction  that  the  computal  note  is  merely 
a  copied  one,  and  that  Escor.  T  II  24  may  be  fairly  held 
to  confirm   the  value  of  tl  as  a  criterion  for  dating. 

The  MS  Escor.  a  I  13^)  furnishes  an  excellent  instance 
of  the  caution  with  which  the  inscriptions  and  subscriptions  of 
Spanish  MSS  must  be  used.^)  According  to  a  note  in  cursive 
on  f.  186^  the  MS  was  written  "regnante  adefonso  principe  in 
era  DCCCCL"  i.  e.  in  912.  Ewald  has  pointed  out  that  in  912 
there  was  no  reigning  Alphonse,  as  Alphonse  III  had  died 
in  910.  By  assuming  that  the  scribe  inserted  a  superfluous  C 
he  gets  era  DCCCL  corresponding  to  812,  which  agrees  with 
the  reign  of  Alphonse  II  (795 — 843)  and  thus  812  was  (pre- 
sumably) the  date  of  the  MS.  Munoz  has  912.  The  des- 
cription in  the  Exempla  is  "fortasse  812'',  the  reservation  being 


^)  More  precisely  one  of  the  scribes  of  this  MS  whose  writing  is 
seen  in  our  plate.  The  facsimile  in  the  Exempla  shows  another  hand 
which  does  not  make  this  type  of  shaft. 

2)  For  literature  see  no.  50  of  list. 

3)  Other  examples  are  not  wanting.  Of.  nos.  3.S,  34,  45,  52,  84 
and  102  of  list. 


doubtless  a  concession  by  Ewald  to  Loewe.  For  according  to 
the  latter's  notes  as  edited  by  Hartel  the  date  of  the  MS  was 
912  and  not  812.  Ewald's  explanation  did  not  seem  thor- 
oughly convincing  to  Traube.  But  Beer's  date  is  812.  In 
connection  with  one  of  the  Codices  Ovetenses  mentioned  in  the 
inventory  of  882  he  notes:  "es  ist  zweifellos  der  heutige 
Escorialensis  a  I  13  'de  la  yglesia  de  Oviedo'  (vgl. 
Hartel-Loewe,  p.  10  ff.),  dessen  Beschreibung  in  alien 
wesentlichen  Stiicken  mit  der  vorliegenden  uberein- 
stimmt.  Durch  diese  Identifikation  wird  auch  die 
Datierung  (des  ersten  Teiles  des  Codex)  812  (Jahr  der 
Alphonsischen  Schenkung,  nicht  912)  gestutzt".  But 
can  not  the  Escorialensis  be  a  copy  of  a  MS  which  Avas 
presented  in  812  and  catalogued  in  882?  Whereas  against 
this  early  date  is  the  script  of  the  MS,  which  is  not  of  the  old 
type.  The  letters  are  somewhat  irregular  and  awkward,  which 
lends  the  script  an  appearance  of  antiquity.  The  shafts  of 
tall  letters  thicken  at  the  end.  The  upright  strokes  of  m  and 
n  thicken  below  and  turn  out.  The  abbreviation  sign  over 
h  and  q  is  an  s-like  flourish.  Judged  by  purely  graphic 
standards  the  MS  should  belong  at  the  beginning  of  the  10^^ 
century.  As  for  the  subscription  the  very  nature  of  the  error 
in  it  hints  that  it  was  copied  from  an  original  having  DCCCL. 
The  scribe  unconsciously  inserted  the  extra  C  because  he  was 
accustomed  to  writing  DCCCC  —  a  type  of  mistake  we  commit 
every  January.  Thus  though  the  year  912  need  not  be  the  exact 
date  when  the  MS  was  copied,  it  is  more  than  likely  that  it 
was  Avritten  after  era  900,  which  would  fully  account  for  the 
presence  of  the  ^i-distinction,  not  found  in  the  MSS  of  the 
beginning  of  the  9^^  century. 

The  MS  Madrid  Tolet.  43.  5 1)  shows  a  cruder  and  less 
calligraphic  type  of  writing  than  the  MS  just  considered  and 
that  perhaps  lends  it  an  impression  of  antiquity.    But  it  lacks 

ij  Cf.  no.  44  of  list. 


84 


12.  Ahlinndlunjx:  E.  A.  liOow 


all  resemblance  to  the  earliest  kind  of  Visi<j^()thic  writing,  having 
the  same  features  as  those  noted  in  Escor.  a  I  13.  The  editors 
of  the  Exempla  date  it  "saec.  ix,  si  non  antiqiiior".  Again  I 
believe  we  have  a  sort  of  compromise  between  the  duumviri. 
For  Loewe's  more  precise  description  (in  Bibl.  P.  L.  H.,  p.  299) 
makes  distinct  mention  of  the  more  recent  character  of  the 
script.  "Die  HS  gehort  jedenfalls  dem  IX.  Jahrhundert: 
sie  zeigt  nicht  die  alte  gedriickte  Schrift  icie  der  Toletancr  Isidor 
(the  same  script  as  my  plate  3),  zeigt  aber  denselben 
Charakter  wie  spiitere  HSS."  —  This  MS  makes  the  ti- 
distinction.  It  shows  the  more  recent  type  of  writing.  Loewe's 
own  words  tend  to  confirm  the  validity  of  the  ^i-criterion. 


The  MS  Madrid  Acad,  de  la  Hist.  20  (F  186)^)  is  another 
of  those  upon  the  date  of  which  scholars  have  expressed  the  most 
divergent  opinions.  According  to  a  subscription  it  was  written 
in  662,  and  even  this  date  has  had  its  supporter.  The  editors 
of  the  Exempla  put  it  in  the  10^''  century,  yet  in  their  separate 
reports  Ewald  and  Loewe  give  different  dates.  The  former 
says  "saec.  ix''  the  latter  "saec.  vni".  Again  I  believe  that  the 
awkwardness  of  the  script  was  mistaken  for  antiquity.  But 
the  script  is  against  an  early  date.  The  opinion  expressed 
in  the  Exempla  is  most  likely  correct.  The  fact  that  the 
^i-distinction  is  made  in  one  part  of  the  volume  and  not  in 
another  is  surely  not   without  importance    in   dating  this  MS. 


The  MS  Escor.  S  I  16^)  has  for  some  inexplicable  reason 
been  put  into  the  11*^  century  by  the  editors  of  the  Exempla. 
I  believe  that  no  study  of  its  script  could  leave  this  date  un- 
challenged. According  to  Eguren  the  MS  is  by  two  centuries 
older.     To  be  sure  Eguren  is  trying  to  identify  the  MS  with 


*)  For  Hterature  see  no.  45  of  Hst. 
^)  For  Hterature  see  no.  56  of  list. 


Studia  palaeographica. 


85 


one  mentioned  in  the  Oviedo  inventory  of  the  year  882,  which 
may  perhaps  have  biased  him  in  favor  of  a  date  anterior. 
But  even  if  we  do  not  fully  agree  with  his  statement  that 
"the  character  of  the  script  employed  in  this  important  MS 
corresponds  to  the  first  half  of  the  9*^^  century"  it  is  still  much 
nearer  the  truth  than  the  date  given  by  Ewald  and  Loewe. 
The  MS  makes  no  /i-distinction.  And  if,  as  I  believe,  my 
date  is  right,  it  furnishes  no  exception  to  the  //-criterion  estab- 
li.shed  by  our  investigation. 


Where  there  is  so  much  dispute  and  uncertainty,  pure 
palaeography  will  have  to  say  the  last  word.  I  believe  that 
in  the  long  run  we  are  less  apt  to  go  wrong  in  the  matter 
of  dating,  if  we  respect  the  hints  learned  from  a  careful  study 
of  the  script  than  if  we  allow  ourselves  to  be  guided  purely 
by  inner  evidence.  The  letter  is  less  likely  to  prove  misleading 
than  a  subscription.  The  latter  may  be  copied;  but  the  scribe 
did  not  and  could  not  disguise  his  hand.  The  form  of  the 
letters  he  made  infallibly  betrays  his  epoch. 


86 


12.  Abhandlun<»:  E.  A.  Loew 


Plates. 


1.  Vercelli  CLXXXIII.       saec.  viii. 

An  excellent  example  of  north  Italian  book-cursive.  Superior 
a  is  frequent,  i-longa  occurs  regularly  initially  (1.  2,  5)  and  also 
medially,  ^  is  used  indifferently  (1.  11).  Noteworthy  is  the  form 
of  2   (1.  11).      Of    the   many  abbreviations    may    be    mentioned: 

_  _  -  CO 

ni,    na,    nam  ^=  nostri,   nostra,  nostram;   n    =  nunc,   p     =  pro, 

p  =r  post,  q  =  quo,  u  =  vero,  t  with  horizontal  flourish  =  ter, 
t  with  vertical  wavy  stroke  =  tur. 

2.  Paris  lat.  653.      saec.  viii/ix. 

A  specimen  of  transition  writing.  Our  facsimile  reproduces 
two    hands.     The  first   shows  cursive  traditions;    it  uses   i-longa, 

9  (for  soft  ti),  the  ligatures  of  n,  st  etc.     Characteristic   is  the  r 

with  the  shoulder  extending  over  the  following  letter.    The  second 

hand   lacks  i-longa,   ^,  ligatures  of  ri,  st  etc.  and   represents  the 

more  modern  tendency.    Abbreviations  are  frequent.     Noteworthy 

are  iisr  =  noster   (5  times),  ner  =  noster,   nfn  =  nostrum   (also 

nrm),  noris  =  nostris,  n  =  nostro  (once),  ueri  =  vestri ;  mia  and 
ma  =  misericordia.  For  some  of  these  details  I  am  indebted  to 
Dr.  A.  Souter. 

3.  Monte  Cassino  4.       saec.  ix  in. 

Visigothic  writing  of  the  first  period.  The  fj-distinction  is 
not  made  (1.  1,  2  etc.)  in  the  text.  An  addition  in  the  margin 
has  a  ^OT  soft  ti  (1.  3).  Note  the  abbreviation  of  bus  and  r/wc. 
The  last  stroke  of  m,  n  and  h  turns  in.  The  tall  letters  have 
simple  shafts.  Observe  that  a  Cassinese  scribe  of  the  U^h  cent- 
ury transcribed  the  Visigothic  marginal  entry  in  cursive. 

4.  Madrid  Tolet.  15.  12.       a.  915. 

A  MS  of  the  transition  period.  Our  facsimile  shows  two  hands. 
Col.  1  represents  the  more  modern  style,  with  O)  for  soft  ti  (1, 1,2,6). 
The  vertical   strokes   of  rn   and  n   thicken  and  turn  out,   the   tall 


Studia  palaeographica. 


87 


letters  end  in  thick  clubs,  the  letters  are  rather  well  spaced.  The 
M.s-symbol  is  made  in  one  s-like  flourish.  The  hand  of  col.  2  shows 
the  old  school.  The  f/-distinction  is  not  made  (1.  13  and  14).  The 
letters  are  not  so  well  spaced,  m,  n  and  h  recall  the  oldest  type. 
The  tall  letters  have  simple  shafts.  The  i/s-symbol  is  made  in 
two  strokes.  The  plate  is  taken  from  Ewald  and  Loewe. 
5.  Escor.  T  II  24  (formerly  Q  II  24).      saec.  x. 

The  palaeographical  features  to  which  attention  should  be 
called  are:  1.  The  general  spacing  and  height  of  letters.  2.  The 
vertical  strokes  of  w,  w,  i  etc.,  which  thicken  and  turn  out. 
3.  The  prefix  at  the  end  of  tall  letters.  4.  The  «-like  stroke  for  us. 
5.  The  use  of  O)  for  soft  ti.  These  graphic  peculiarities  place  the 
MS  in  the  lO^'i  century. 

0.  Escorial  d  I  1.       a.  992. 

Our  facsimile  illustrates  the  third  sta^e  of  Visigothic  calli- 
graphy, when  the  script  had  already  reached  the  highest  point 
and  was  beginning  to  decline.  The  graphic  features  noted  in 
plate  5  also  characterize  this  MS,  only  the  writing  is  more  formed 
and   more   regular.     The  plate  is  taken   from   Ewald  and  Loewe. 

7.  Rom.  Corsinian.  369.      saec.  xii. 

A  specimen  of  Visigothic  writing  in  its  last  stage,  showing 
the  decay  of  traditional  forms.  The  abbreviation  of  tur  and  the 
?/.s-symbol  show  the  continental  influence  to  which  the  script 
succumbed. 


Addenda  et  Corrigenda. 

P.  4  and  n.  4  for  Rivera  read  Rivero. 

P.  17    n.  1.     In  connection  with  the  MS  Paris  13  24G  it  should  be  noted 

that   ci   for    assibilated   ti   is    also    frequently    found    in    MSS   of 

Rhaetian  origin. 
P.  25  n.  1    for  Bluhme  read  Blume;   n.  2   for  Yales  read  Yates. 
P.  30    for  Vatic,  lat.  317  read  Vatic.  Regin.  lat.  317. 
P.  34    for  Trousseures  read  Troussures. 
P.  39    Vienna  17  cannot  be  said  to  form  part  of  Naples  IV  A  8,  although 

it  belongs  in  the  same  group  with  it. 


88 


12.  Abhiindlung:  E.  A.  Loew 


Studia  palaeogniphica. 


89 


,  *!"      ) ! 


Index  of  MSS. 


Admont   Fragm.   Prophet. 

(Ezechiel)  33 

Albi  29  62 

Autiin  24  30 

-       27  30,  47,  53,  57,,  77, 


Bamberg  B  III  4 

38 

—     B  V  13 

35 

H  J  IV  15 

46 

Barcelona  RivipuUensis 

46 

60 

— 

m 

66 

Berne  A  92.  3 

60 

—        376 

49 

-       611 

35, 

49, 

Bologna  Univ.  1604 

45i 

Breslau  Rhedig.  R  169 

44 

Brussels  9850—52 

86 

Cambrai  470  30 

Cambridge  Corpus  Christi  Col- 
lege K  8  34, 
Carlsruhe  Reich.  LVII                 43 
Cava  1  (formerly  14)                    62 

Dublin  Trinity  College  A  4.  6 
(Book  of  Mulling)  50 

Dublin  Trinity  College  A  4.  23 
(Book  of  Dimma)  50 


Einsiedeln     27 

—  157 

—  199 

—  281 

—  347 


49 
49 
49 
49 
49 


Kpinal  68 
Escorial  a 

—  a 

—  d 
_  d 

—  e 

—  I 

—  P 

—  P 

—  R 

—  S 

—  T 


1 

II 
I 
I 
1 

HI 
1 
I 

II 
1 

II 

II 
1 
I 

II 


13 
9 
1 
2 

13 
13 
6 
/ 
18 
16 
24 

25 
3 

14 
5 


4,  35, 
67,  82, 


72, 


36 

84 
70 
87 
71 
72 


63, 

57,  58,  63, 

68, 

52„  67, 

81,  82,  822, 
63, 


T 

& 
& 
& 

Benedictio  cerei  (Came- 
rin   de  las   reliquias) 


Florence  Laur.  51. 
—  —     68. 


10 

2  9.2, 

15,  18.,, 

—  —     Ashburnh.   17 

52„ 

—  —     S.  Marco  604 
Fulda  Bonifatianus  2 


Ivrea  1 

Laon  137 
-     423 
Leon  Cathedr.     2 
—  —  6 


64 
61 
822 

/  /2 

84 

76, 

87 

822 

73 

fi9 

73 

77, 

13 

13, 
46 

71 

15 
32 

32 


24„  34 

24„  34 

75 

69 


Leon  Cathedr 

.  14 

66 

Madrid  Tolet.  2.  1                       57 

—           — 

15 

58 

—          —    10.  25  (now  10007) 

—          — 

21 

70 

66,  77,  78i 

—           — 

22 

60 

—          —  11.     3        69,  78,,  79 

Fragm.  8 

60 

14.  22 

London  (British  Museum) 

(now  10029)       65,  78, 

—       Cotton  Tib.  C  II 

50 

—          -   14. 24  (now  10018)    59 

—       Egerton 

1934 

58 

—          —  15.     8         58,  67,  81 

—       Harley  3063 

38 

—          —  15.  12  (now  10067) 

—           — 

5041 

34 

68,  78,,  86 

-      Add. 

MS 

11695        75, 

82. 

—  35.  1  (now  10001)  66 

—        — 

— 

11878 

32 

—          —  35.  2  (now  10110) 

___  ■       «— 

25600 

69 

73,  822 

— 

29972 

32 

—          —  43.  5  (now  10064) 

30844 

69 

65,  83 

—_        — 

30845 

71 

—  Beatus  super  Apocal.          74 

__        — 

30846 

71 

Forum  Judicum  (Leon)       74 

tm^^                                  *M> 

30847 

72 

—  Archiv.  Hist.  989-B          76 



30848 

75 

—  Royal   Private   Library 

— 

30850 

72 

2  J  5                                  74 

—                                    — . 

— 

30851 

72 

—  Univ.  31                                61 

___                                    

— - 

30852 

63 

—      —     32                                 62 

__ 

30854 

64 

Manchester  John  Rylands   MS 

._                                    _— . 

30855 

74 

lat.  93                                 67,  77 

—                                     

— 

31031 

34 

ManQhesterJohn  Rylands  MS  99  70 

—     Thompsonianus  8 

250 

—            —         —     —  116  62 

97       65 

,79 

Milan    Ambros.    Josephus    (pa- 

Lucca 490 

30, 

44 

pyrus)                                  11,  39 

Lyon  523 

32,  20 

,  30 

Milan  Ambros.    B  31  sup.           40 

C  98  inf.     28,  39 

Madrid  Acad. 

His 

b.  20  (F  186) 

—         C  105  inf.           39 

65 

,  77,  78,,  82. 

,  84 

-         D  268  inf.  •        39 

—         — 

Hist.  24  (F  188) 

;        —          —         L  99  sup.           40 

68 

.  78, 

—         0  210  sup.         4I2 

Hist.  25  (F  194) 

70 

—          —         S  45  sup.     30,40, 

—         — 

— 

F211 

74 

Milan  Trivulziana  688                 44 

F212 

71 

Modena  0  I  N  11                           44 

—         — 

F192 

75 

Monte   Cassino     4                  58,  86 

Madrid  (Bibl 

.  Nacion.)  A  2 

i       —           —          5                         46 

(now 

2) 

74 

19                        59 

—        A  115  (now  112) 

74 

—      150                          32 

—        P  21 

(now  1872) 

68 

—           —      187                        47 

—        R  216  (now  6367) 

75 

289                        15 

90 


12.  Abhamllwnij:  E.  A.  liOew 


Stadia  palaeo^'niphica. 


91 


Monte  Cassino  295 

—  —       303 

—  —       332 

—  —       753 

Munich  (Hof-  iind  Staatsbil.l.) 

—  hit.      4542 

—  -      4547 

—  —      4549 

—  —     4564 

—  —     4623 

—  —      4719'" 

—  —      6277 

—  —      6402 

—  —      6437 

—  —    14102 

—  —   14421 

—  —   29033 

—  —   29158 


Naples  (Bibl.  Naz.)  JV  A  8 
-  —  VI  B  12 


46 
15 
15 
46 

48 
47 
48 
48 
10 
48 
48 
48 
13 


32 


48 
32 
33, 

39 
46 


No  vara  Capitol.  84 

Oxford    IJodl.  Canon.    Class. 

lat.   41 

—  —      Douce  f.  1 

—  —  -      140 

—  —      Laud.  108 

¥i\Y\?^  (Bibl.  Nations le) 


30,  44 


15 
36 
50 
50, 


lat.        653  5„  43,  86 

—  1732  -io 
2855  70 

—  299 1  59 
3836  37 
4667  59 
750&  178 
7530  263,  46 
8093  59 
8913  30 
8921  24,.  37 
9427           31  and  11.  1 

10837  50 

—  10^76  9,,  64 


Paris  lat.  10877 

9i,  64 

— 

—  11529 

38 

—  11530 

38 

— 

—  11627 

37 

1 

—  116S1 

37 

—  12097 

20 

—  12134 

37 

~  12135 

38 

—  12155 

38 

—  12168 

24„  33 

— 

—  12217 

38 

—  12254 

60 

-  12  598 

35 

—  13048 

38 

~  13246 

17,,  30 

—  13440 

38 

— 

—  14086 

35 

— 

—  17451 

38 

-  17  655 

31 

Noiiv.  Acq.  lat.  235 

73 

—    —  —  238 

(;i,  68 

—    —  ~  239 

70 

— 

—   -  260 

64,  80, 

—    —  —  1296 

72 

—    —  —  1298 

64,  80, 

— 

—  -  1628 

38,  47, 
53,  57 

"— 

—    —  —  1629 

47,  53, 
57, 

-    —  —  2167 

64 

— 

—    _  —  2168 

62 

— 

—    _  _  2169 

75 

— 

—    —  —  2170 

63,  71 

-   —  2171 

—  —  2176 

73 

—  ~  2177 

73 

2178 

73 

2179 

72 

— 

—    —  _  2180 

72 

-- 

r.alu/A'  270 

44 

Rome  Basilicanus  D  182 

3-2 

Casanat.  641 1 

252 

Rome  Corsinian.  369  76,  87 

Home  Sessor.  40  (Vittorio 

Emanuele  1258)  45 

Rome  Sessor.  41  (V.  E.  1479)       45 

—         —    55(V.E.2099)     30,44 


—  —    63(V.E.2102) 

—  —    66  (V.  E.  2098) 

—  —    94  (V.  E.  1524) 

—  —    96(V.  E.  1565) 
Rome  Vallicell.  D  5 
Rome  Vatie.  lat.  491 

—  —      —     595 

—  -       —  3320 

—  —      —  3342 

—  —      —  3375 

—  —      —  3973 
~         —      —  5007 

—  —  —  5763 
Borgian 
Pal.  lat 


—      Vatic. 


—      Reirin. 


45 
45 
45 
45 
46 
50 
46 
46 
25, 

32 

46 
30 
40 

46 

50 

50, 

50 

36 


St.  Gall 


44 
70 
185 
214 
238 
348 
722 
731 
914 


lat.  339 

68 
202 
235 
lat.  316 

—  317 

30,  32, 

—  1024     30 

49 
49 
49 

34,  49, 
49 
49 

30,  49 
49 


St.  Paul   in  Carinthia  XXV  * 
Sigiienza  Decretale  150 


Toledo  Capitol.  99. 
Tours  615 


30 


49 

31 
61 

62 
64 


Troussures  Nov.  Test.  34 

!    Turin  (Bibl.  Nazion.)  **A  II  2  40 

-          -     D  V  3  37 

I      —         -     F  IV  1   fasc.  6  50 

!       -          —     G  V  26  40 

—     G  VII  15  15 

Vercelli  Capitol.  CXLVIII  44 

—  -         CLVIII  432 

—  -         CLXXXIIT  12, 

27,  28,  43,  86 

—  —         CLXXXVIII  30 

—  —         ecu  43 
Verona  Capitol.  1                  40,  41 

—  —         11  41 

—  ~         III  41 

—  IV  41 

—  —         XV  42 

—  --         XXXIll  41 

—  -          XXXVIl  42 

—  XXXVIII  42 

—  XL  31 

—  XLII  41 

—  —         LV  42 

—  —         LXI  42 

—  —         LXII  42 

—  —         LXXXIX  153, 

47,  51 2,  53,  56 

—  —         CLXIII  42 
Vienna  (Hof-Bibl.)  lat.  16  50 

—  lat.        17  39 

—  -       847  33 

—  —     1616  35 

Wolfenbiittel  Weissenb.    64  40 

—                    —          99  32 

Wiii-zburg  Mp.  Theol.  Fol.  64*  33 

Ziirirh  Cantonsbibl.  CXL  49 

—              —    (Rheinau)30  49 


i 


I 


m 


to 


a 


a 


m 


(U 


<^ 


W 


X 
X 


o 


01 


(U 


(L> 


I 


X 


o 

CO 


CO 


aj 


to 


03 

a. 


-3 


w 


i- 


ti^. 


i^. 


fO 


fl^ 


a 


a 
to 


<u 


r3 


C/3 


o; 


W 


c 


i"^ 


w 


VO 


(U 


lO 


a 


C/i 


(D 


W 


X 


o 

CD 


•*  ^ 

N 


o 


<L) 


CS 


OJ 


o 

CO 


2\^ 


o 


a 


Kj 


CO 


(U 


ta 


E.  A.  Loew     Studia  Palaeographica 


PI.   7 


,^ 


••V. 


Si. 


fe 


jtft^ a^uxxx^dtbtt'  ofnSctiuxr:  fltftrofw^tm.  ijo^  ■•;.>:. . 
&rtf>&t' <c5f  aVtrotttr  *tof  tTttf  Ota  ii  f  t^    "    -* "'"" 


^««^ 


P 


r 
r 

I 


■"^WJ. 


Rome  Corsinian.  369         saec.  XII 


